The Sitcom Trials 2012 Page 21

THE SCARE ROOM - NO
I liked the use of the cell phone, but a lot of the dialogue made me groan endlessly. None of the characters are particularly well defined for this to be a successful sitcom.

KILL BOB - NO
This started off well enough before it got a bit weird and disjointed. The section where they trade insults is poorly written, and I'm afraid after there it just got worse.

FRIENDS LIKE THESE - NO
For such a small scene, there are so many characters, and none of them appear to have very original voices. I couldn't get into the spirit of this one.

Thanks for the votes so far. If you're able to upload all your votes in one go like Trinder just did, rather than in small batches (eg 3 at a time) it makes it easier for me to tally them up.

Just trying to make my own life easier, sorry to be selfish. All votes appreciated, thankyou incredibly.

Kev F

I did upload all of mine at once. It's really unlikely I'll have the time to read/critique the rest, so I chose a few at random to review.

Working my way through them (and I'm nearly there... I've spent a lot longer reading them and trying to comment than I did hurriedly writing my entry) but wanted to ask something:

I was sure that I remember seeing the cast restrictions as max of 3 male and 3 female characters but when going to check I can only spot it saying 6 characters - with no individual gender restrictions, so presumably 6 men or 6 women would be fine...

I'm beginning to wonder if I imagined the 3/3 split due to that being the cast makeup at the 2 SitCom Trials I've attended.

Is it just 6 in total or is it 3M/3F or similar?

Asking as I don't think it's tipped any script from one vote to another, but I've been commenting on it if the (possibly imaginary) 3M/3F is broken...

Quote: Judgement Dave @ August 30 2012, 12:04 AM BST

Working my way through them (and I'm nearly there... I've spent a lot longer reading them and trying to comment than I did hurriedly writing my entry) but wanted to ask something:

I was sure that I remember seeing the cast restrictions as max of 3 male and 3 female characters but when going to check I can only spot it saying 6 characters - with no individual gender restrictions, so presumably 6 men or 6 women would be fine...

I'm beginning to wonder if I imagined the 3/3 split due to that being the cast makeup at the 2 SitCom Trials I've attended.

Is it just 6 in total or is it 3M/3F or similar?

Asking as I don't think it's tipped any script from one vote to another, but I've been commenting on it if the (possibly imaginary) 3M/3F is broken...

View original

Hi,

This time around, we've asked for a maximum of six characters total. A 3/3 split would be ideal, but any combination is good. As long as it's funny!

Thank you all for the votes - keep them coming!

Having spent a few nights reading the scripts (no way I could do it in one go), here are my thoughts and votes:

WHO JUDGES THE JUDGES:
Silly enough, and could work with a live audience, especially with the character of Bob (who I think is Scottish, but I can’t tell). Quite a slow burner and the cliffhanger is built up way too quickly
MAYBE

13 GORMLEY STREET:
Script kicks off quickly, and the resolution appeared less exciting than the cliffhanger, but is saved by some good dialogue and chemistry between characters. MAYBE

A WOMB WITH A VIEW TO A KILL
Oh god, yes. Hilarious lines in an even more ridiculous concept. If only there was more action in between, but other than that, I laughed a lot, and I get the feeling audiences definitely will. YES

BLACKSTABLE
I struggled to get through this. In itself it is well written, and has a very Halloween feel to it, although I couldn’t sense much sitcom potential in it altogether. NO

CAFE RICO
Decent script, but I’m sure if the type of cafe it is set in works with the Halloween theme. Characters could do with a little more personality, but other than that, decent. MAYBE

COUNTRY ROCK
This has potential. Although with the physical limitations, I’m intrigued to see how the apocalyptic feel will be presented on stage (without difficulty). Interesting characters with just as interesting dialogue. Just wished there was more reference to the characters’ previous rock star lives. YES

DRASZIC’S LOT
Trying not to make any comparisons to the Munsters or Addams Family, but it does have that feel. Easily accessible, and works as a sitcom while certain references don’t get too far off focus. Slightly more/longer scenes than I expected though. YES

ENTER TWINEMAN
Takes some time to get going, and interesting characters, even if there are more than necessary. Good writing. MAYBE

FEMME FATALE
Good enough plot but was a bit unsure about the end. Fun concept. MAYBE

FRIENDS LIKE THESE
An average script, about friends getting together (surely there’s been a few of these sitcoms by now). The characters weren’t too special and struggled to get my attention. Good dialogue, but it doesn’t save this as a sitcom. NO

ISTANBUL/TWILIGHT OF THE BONE IDLE
Nice Sitcom Trials reference in the script (not to be taken seriously, this is comedy after all)! Some good material in here, and just as good characterisation. Also, the prospect of a skull talking on stage interests me. YES

KILL BOB
A comedy with God, The Devil and Bob...well, Satan (I hope someone gets that reference). Good dialogue, and interesting characters, who just need some more development, and then you have a potential winner here. MAYBE

PURGATORY
Good concept, setting, premise, characters! However, with it being purgatory, you can have the characters do a lot more here than they already do. MAYBE

RANDOLPH CARTER’S CASEBOOK: THE SHADOW OUT OF OUTSMITH
I haven’t read much Lovecraft or Conan Doyle (and I call myself a writer!) that the script references to, but as a story this is fine. Catchy dialogue and warm, likeable characters. YES

RED SKY AT NIGHT
Great dialogue, although not always as sharp as it can be. Strong characters as well. YES

ROY RICHARDS: LETHAL GARDENER
Gardening! Aaaaaaaargh (in my scared voice)! Anyway, this is well-written, but I wasn’t fully sure where this was going. If I did, then I would have given this a yes. MAYBE

SEPERATE PARENTS
A nice Halloween plot about a former broken family, and the writers have taken advantage of this to create a good sitcom. MAYBE

SHEEPSBERE BAY/STORM IN A TEACUP
Unless I’m blind, where was the cliffhanger meant to be? And why are the characters laughing too much? Other than that, this is a very fun sitcom. Great dialogue, and a setting which, to be honest, I wasn’t expecting much from. YES

THE BRIDES OF PETE-ENSTEIN
Starting off, I was worried about the set up, and if I’ve seen it before, but the sitcom is saved by the actions and dialogue of the characters. MAYBE

THE CENTIPEDE HUMAN
I created and co-wrote this, but I’ll say a few words about it to explain it. It’s not meant to be like The Human Centipede, so don’t take it too seriously! Also, the reasons for creating the “centipede human” were changed from that of the scientist in the film to make it more of a comedy. Also, the centipede human will appear far easier on stage than doubters expected. YES!

THE GHOST PARTNER
This stands out from other scripts, but not for the right reasons. Good dialogue, but its format isn’t written like a sitcom, and I’m not sure how this can be staged unless there is a major re-write. NO

THE LORD MAYOR: TRICK OR NO TREAT
Interesting concept for the Lord Mayor, but that’s all there is to it, on this occasion. Characters need better definition in order for this to work as a sitcom. NO

THE SCARE ROOM
Some good dialogue, however there are better sitcom scripts I’ve read here. Maybe next time? NO

THE WITCHING HOUR
Another entry from Ian Keiller (are you allowed to enter more than one script per Sitcom Trial?). Anyway, this is a very good sitcom, with great dialogue and characters strong enough to follow. MAYBE

THREE EX-HUSBANDS AND A VICAR
Good writing, a structured plot, good dialogue, but I’m not sure about the relationship between the characters, and themselves in general, in order for this to be a really good sitcom. MAYBE

THREE IN TOW
This surprised me and caught my attention. Interesting ideas and good dialogue. MAYBE

WHAT WAS THAT
Features a lot of humour that I like, and some strongly defined characters and dialogue. YES

There you go. Don't forget to vote if you haven't done so! All these sitcoms depend on your votes

Some good reads here mixed amongst the not so good, but, hey, what do I know, sorry if the 'NO' votes hinders your chance of stardom...

I also felt there was a distinct lack of adherence to the brief but as long as everyone has had a good time...

WHO JUDGES THE JUDGES:
Seemed more of a one off play than a sitcom : NO

13 GORMLEY STREET:
Wasn't too bad, some amusing moments. MAYBE

A WOMB WITH A VIEW TO A KILL:
Didn't read like a sitcom. NO

BLACKSTABLE:
Had some good dialogue exchanges. MAYBE

CAFE RICO:
Rather uninspiring. NO

COUNTRY ROCK: HALLOWEEN SPECIAL:
Long and uninteresting. NO

DRASZIC'S LOT:
A bit weird but might do well. MAYBE

ENTER TWINEMAN:
Another that seemed more like a one off. NO

FEMME FATALE:
I think the number of scene changes let this down. NO

FRIENDS LIKE THESE:
Seemed I've watched this before somewhere, it was amusing. YES

ISTANBUL: TWILIGHT OF THE BONE IDLE:
Just a bit too much talk for me. NO

KILL BOB:
A tad bizarre but could easy get a few laughs. YES

PURGATORY : LOST SOULS:
It didn't hold my attention for long. NO

RANDOLPH CARTER:
A bit scatty but not for me. NO

RED SKY AT NIGHT:
A touch too heavy for a sitcom. NO

ROY RICHARDS:
Started off well but soon faded. NO

SEPARATE PARENTS:
I think having a baby in the piece voids this, NO

STORM IN A TEA CUP:
I don't think the audience will be laughing as much as the cast. NO

THE BRIDES OF PETE-ENSTEIN:
I couldn't get into this, just a tad too heavy. NO

THE CENTIPEDE HUMAN:
Probably the wackiest of the lot but alas not very funny. NO

THE GHOST PARTNER:
This read more like a monologue than a sitcom. NO

THE LORD MAYOR:
Pacy, had some good patter. MAYBE

THE SCARE ROOM:
Never tickled my funny bone. NO

THE WITCHING HOUR:
I liked this, great dialogue art times. YES

THREE EX HUSBANDS: NO
Sorry, this seemed to miss the mark on all counts. NO

THREE IN TOW:
Cliffhanger went on a bit but was ok. MAYBE

TRICK OR TREAT:
Proabably the most 'Halloween' of the lot, some sharp dialogue and visual comedy. YES

WHAT WAS THAT:
One what I wrote. YES

Hello!

Next Bristol Sitcom Trials Team meeting: Sunday Sept 2nd - ALL WELCOME!

On the fields of Flanders in February 1918, British officer Major Summerfield was struck by lightning. He fell off his horse and was paralysed from the waist down. After the war, he retired to Vancouver, to indulge his passion for fishing. In 1924, as he fished alongside a river, lightning hit the tree he was sitting under. The tree fell on him, paralysing his right side. Remarkably, he recovered, and four years later he had regained the use of his legs. He was walking through a park when he was struck by lightning and completely paralysed. He died two years later. Four years later, lightning struck a cemetery and completely destroyed his tombstone.

The next meeting of the slightly luckier Bristol Sitcom Trials team will take place at the Oxford pub, Oxford Street, Totterdown, 3pm, on Sunday 2nd September. It would be very splendid indeed if you could come along. Everybody is welcome, we especially like to see new faces, so please feel free to come along.

We'll be reading the top five scripts (as voted by peer review) entered into competition for the Halloween Sitcom Trials. From that five, we'll be choosing at least two scripts to take forward to the show on Friday October 19th. We'll also discuss scripts in progress from the Bristol team, and we'll examine German Chancellor Angela Merkel's handling of the Eurozone liquidity crisis and its impact on long-term global fiscal policy decisions.

See you Sunday, if I can avoid being struck by lightning.

Kind regards and very best wishes,

--Vince

Thank you, Vince, for that inspiring tale, and for reinforcing our legitimate distrust of all things Belgian or Canadian - including their weather!

Back to the votes - mine are as follows:-

13 Gormley Street.
Likeable, funny and manic at the start. It tails off midway, but overall -
YES

BLackStable
A nice premise, but too mild in the humour stakes.
NO

Brides of Pete-enstein
Pleasantly wacky and fast-moving. Not all the jokes worked, but I think it would get some good laughs in a live performance.
YES.

Cafe Rico
Too much empty chatting for me. Liked the dark ending, but there wasn't enough going on in the lead up to it.
NO

Country Rock
The lead up to the cliffhanger seemed to last a looong time and some of the dialogue could do with trimming. But it had engaging characters with some nice jokes.
YES.

Draszic's Lot
Silly fun stuff.
YES.

Enter Twineman
I found a lot of the lines were too long for any jokes to work. Trimmed and tightened it might play ok, but as it is -
NO.

Friends like These
I've always liked 'inspector calls'-type stories, so I suppose this had an unfair advantage. The characters and jokes could do with trimming though.
MAYBE.

Istanbul
Felt like a scene from the middle of a play. The play might be fab, but as a 15 min sitcom?
NO

Kill Bob
It didn't tickle me I'm afraid. I get the feeling it's a comedy with earlier episodes, so maybe it would mean more if I'd read them, but I haven't.
NO

Purgatory
Interesting idea with a decent story. Plus it was (mostly) funny.
YES.

Randolph Carter's Casebook.
Biased cos I'm a sucker for period spoofs and a big fan of Lovecraft. On the whole it was funny and engaging.
YES.

Red Sky at Night
Read more like a comic drama, but had a story and characters which is a plus.
MAYBE

Roy Richards Lethal Gardener
Interesting premise, but a slow buildup, and a story that didn't grab me.
NO.

Separate Parents.
A THOUSAND TIMES "YES"! (And each of those thousand votes count by the way - check the Sitcom Trials rules)
YES.

Storm in a Teacup
The Jokes came across as laboured and nothing else really grabbed me.
NO.

The Centipede Human
Intriguing idea and very in your face, but I didn't find it funny.
NO.

The Ghost Partner.
The narrator slows things down too much and the actual scenes weren't funny enough. It's not a comment on the writing - this could work as a radio comic-drama, but for sitcom I have to say...
NO

The Lord Mayor
It felt forced and clunky, some of this could have been down to spelling mistakes, but I didn't find it funny anyway.
NO

The Scare Room
Some funny jokes. The formatting and FM1/FM2 labels made it a bit of a chore, but seeing past that...
MAYBE.

The Witching Hour
Often not so much funny as loud. Still, it has energy and I didn't see the twist coming.
MAYBE

Three Ex-Husbands and a Vicar
Despite the dark subject matter it seemed strangely bland.
NO

Three in Tow
Nice idea, well-defined characters but the banter dragged a bit.
MAYBE

Trick or Treat
Some funny lines. I don't really like main characters who are unlikeable for no good reason, but hell I'm not part of the BBC3 generation.
MAYBE.

What was That
Slow to get going, but some funny lines. For the "late sound effect" gag I'll give it...
MAYBE.

Who Judges the Judges
The script within a script thing didn't work for me and it was too static.
NO

Womb with a View to a Kill
Some very, very funny lines - funniest in the competition. But without any interesting story or characters it gets really hard to read and - I'd imagine - watch.
NO

No offence meant to those I gave a "no" to. Hope I haven't missed any. If so, holller cos I may have an hour or two tomorrow to add them.

Well done to all who entered a script this season!

I'm enjoying counting up these votes, keep them coming (I voted over on the Sits Vac egroup), and I'm grateful to Vince for his heads-up about the Sunday Bristol meeting. I'll be there (slightly trepidatious that no-one will know who I am after all this time away) and I hope you all will be too.

Hard work getting all these read! No idea how people did the 40+ of the last run.

'WHO JUDGES THE JUDGES'
Just felt like a piss-take, to be honest. "You big bunch of losers all trying to write sitcom!" Was one of the characters Scottish? There was something that hinted at it, but not quite sure what it was. NO.

13 GORMLEY STREET
All the characters sound the same; they need different voices. That said, at least it gets on with the plot and doesn't piss around with banter/chat so plus marks for that. I didn't buy into 'Mary just coming around' thing at all -- that could have been set up better. But it gets credit for sticking with a plot the whole way through, even though I didn't find it that interesting really. Not sure of the long-term potential as a sitcom. MAYBE

A WOMB WITH A VIEW TO A KILL
First bit felt like a Morecambe & Wise sketch. This one is utterly mental! It's funny -- great one-liners in places but it's so not a sitcom in any way. I'm not even sure what it is. There's no characterisation or plot but I laughed quite a bit though so MAYBE.

BLACKSTABLE
All characters sound the same. Plot should be set up way earlier. At the beginning the <feed line>-<snide remark>-<feed line>-<snide remark> nature was grating, especially as the humour wasn't being derived from the characters or the plot. I kind of lost interest more than anything and that's not really a good thing. Not for me, NO.

CAFE RICO HALLOWEEN
Characters sound very similar so need a bit of development to make them distinct. Keely's massive line of exposition grated a bit; I know it's supposed to be funny but I didn't think it was. It's not bad writing and it's funnier nearer the beginning. It just felt very... linear. Maybe things need spicing up; Cheryl banging on the storeroom door scaring them from the start, they think it's a ghost, then rationally convince themselves it isn't, before the lorry driver situation becomes clear. MAYBE.

COUNTRY ROCK- HALLOWEEN SPECIAL
This is actually a level above most of the other stuff, so certainly one of the more mature sitcoms. There are still flaws though. Felt a bit static; a lot of rambling at times, especially about stuff that's not related to the plot (Chernobyl Dave, the chickens turn out to be irrelevant, was expecting Wonky Alice to make a reappearance of some kind after she was established early on). That said, the characters are distinct and have been developed quite well, which is good. Personally, I had a problem with the hierarchy, as Steve is obviously the authority figure of the piece (and should be) though he's stopped from opening the door by the roadie. That riled a bit. Got right into the plot straight away, which was good, but then that fell away a bit, which was disappointing. Having said all that, it's one of the better written ones. YES.

DRASZIC'S LOT - HALLOWEEN ST
Scene 1 is a lot of fun. Maybe even the most fun I had reading any of these. I actually enjoyed it.
Great stuff. Great characters, good plot and lots of quality gags. Dialogue flows well and the characters stay in character. Should do well on the night. Didn't really get what scene 4 had to do with anything, though. And it would have been nice if the policeman had perhaps appeared at the beginning, before reappearing later on, rather than having two characters 'just turn up' later on. That said, easily the best sitcom here. YES

ENTER TWINEMAN
Lines are too long. Almost monologuing in most cases. Break it up by getting some dialogue in with some jokes. All characters sound the same and having a CLARA and a CLEANER makes the script difficult to read, especially as they sound exactly the same when they speak. Burton-On-The-Bastard was funny though. I actually got quite into the plot where Oscar was worried about Clara being headhunted -- -- though why that took five pages to get to, instead of going straight into it, is anyone's guess. Then it was ignored after that. Rewrite it with THIS AS YOUR PLOT! Didn't feel much after the disappointment of being disappointed. Needs to be funnier though. Bonus points as pretty much the only script that didn't feature 'there is a knock at the door'. Still NO though.

FEMME_FATALE
This is quite funny, but the characters seem really shallow. Perhaps that is a personal thing. The ridiculousness of where the gear is hidden did make me laugh though, but lends itself more to animated sitcom. I'm not sure what the plot actually is here. I thought I did with the mission and everything, but then two blokes started talking and didn't really get anywhere. The word 'CLIFFHANGER' seems to have been dropped in entirely at random. The dialogue is funny. I mean, the lines could all have been said by a single character, as I didn't feel anything for any of them, but they are funny and would probably make an audience laugh during performance so MAYBE.

FRIENDS LIKE THESE
G4 really are shit security -- I agree. The Mary Poppins/Sound of Music are all very funny, but what have they got to do with the plot? It's just stand-up masquerading as sitcom. Plot got going eventually but it felt very slow and wasn't doing it for me. Did it just finish half-way through? That's what it felt like. Quite a few subtle jokes hidden in there that I liked, so MAYBE.

ISTANBUL - 'TWILIGHT OF THE BONE IDLE'
Big, long monologues really off-putting. Can't see how this has any legs as a sitcom, more a one-off. All characters speak the same way. I couldn't get into it, nor did I find it particularly funny. NO.

KILL BOB
It's just chatter to me. No plot for ages, then when it comes along, it's not really clear what's going on. Why is she strangling Bob? Why does Satan turn up? Felt like a confused mess and the indistinctiveness of the characters doesn't help matters. NO.

PURGATORY -- LOST SOULS
Mine, so YES.

RANDOLPH CARTER'S CASEBOOK -- THE SHADOW OUT OF OUTSMITH
Like the voiceover, like the setting, but I think more could be happening. Couple of good gags, but not funny enough for me personally. NO.

RED SKY AT NIGHT -- HALLOWEEN EPISODE
Feels very long. Good dialogue but nothing much happens and it feels a bit static. I was a bit confused with the two women mix-up thing at the end; Teresa pretending to be Elizabeth came from nowhere and then there followed a lot of exposition that should have been wrapped up in funny. I think there's a lot of potential in the setup though. MAYBE.

ROY RICHARDS: LETHAL GARDENER
It's not clear why Jenna wants rid of the gardener, so it could do to set up her irrational hatred of certain people earlier on, then it's not so much of a surprise when she hates Roy. Similarly the Wiccan raising thing needs to be mentioned earlier so it explains Ben's irrational behaviour. There are a few good gags here. All the characters sound similar though, so could do with a bit more development in that respect. It's very much an episode 1 setup, so would be interested to see how this develops with further episodes. YES.

SEPARATE PARENTS -- HALLOWEEN
I co-wrote this, so YES.

STORM IN A TEA CUP
Seems to be a lot of banter at the beginning with nothing much happening, the plot takes ages to come in; should probably start with everyone being told 'the story'. Later on some really long paragraphs that need breaking up into dialogue with some gags. This one is like a really rough first draft and needs a couple of major rewrites, in my opinion. Drunk/plumber gag is good though. NO.

THE BRIDES OF PETE-ENSTEIN
'As naked as tolerable' got one of the biggest laughs in any of the scripts, even though it's a stage direction. Lisa and Keren sound the same but it gets to the plot without fannying around and has some great gags. Definitely YES.

THE CENTIPEDE HUMAN
It feels like a screenplay sort of story, rather than a sitcom and the fact that two of the three characters die doesn't lend itself to more episodes. I thought it was a bit too... weird to be honest. I like the 'party into particle' gag. Not really for me, though, so NO.

THE GHOST PARTNER
There's no action whilst Hilda's talking and as such it feels more like a stand-up character act than a sitcom. Also it feels like more of a drama rather than a plot. Where are the sitcom plot devices? What's the story going to be next episode? It's way too long as well. NO.

THE LORD MAYOR - TRICK BUT NO TREAT
The awful grammar and spelling irritated me to the extent that I couldn't enjoy this at all. Just a lot of gags and not much characterisation, I didn't think. Charlie is deeply unlikeable who thinks he's got a smart mouth, but in truth I didn't care a jot about him. Not for me at all. NO.

THE SCARE ROOM
Just give your characters names! That way it's easier to relate to them as I found them distant because of this. More sexual references at the beginning: boring. Feels like a long sketch without any potential for longevity. NO.

THE WITCHING HOUR
Great pace. Great laugh from "F/X: BABS AND VELVET STARE, NONPLUSSED." That's the best F/X out of any of the scripts here; I wonder if the Beeb have this in their audio effects archive? Not sure how it works as a sitcom as it feels like a one-off so would be interested to see further episodes, but this particular one, though very funny with some great gags, just didn't feel like a sitcom itself. YES though, as the writing is there, I feel.

THREE EX HUSBANDS AND A VICAR
The lines are way too long. They are funny quite frequently, but pretty much every line is bordering on monologue. You can really feel the pace pick up during the shorter exchanges. Also there's a lot of exposition regarding prison and his adoption. While that exposition is happening, no plot is. I don't really believe that Jim would have got there before Mike, given Mike's excitement and I certainly don't believe that a woman WHO HAS SEEN A DECAPITATED HEAD WOULD KNOCK ON THE DOOR OF THE HOUSE IT'S LYING OUTSIDE! Also, now Mum knows Jim is coming, why does she kill the second man? And another thing: who are these men? That said, I quite like the premise of the ex-con, cannibal mother moving in to the bachelor pad. It's certainly original. And the peril is quite good. MAYBE.

THREE IN TOW
I like this. Original premise and the characterisation is very good. It's an 'episode one' with her Mum and Roger just turning up so no sitcom plot as such. Though it would be interesting to see a 'normal', mid-series episode. It did seem to drag a bit later on, as there was just dialogue because of there not really being a plot, but decent writing and gags so YES.

TRICK OR TREAT
Mary need to be mentioned much earlier; at the moment it's very convenient that they start talking about her just before she appears. It doesn't feel very sitcommy, this plot. Also Nozza doesn't really bring anything to the story: just a bit-part character without any goals here. That said, pretty good characterisation at the beginning and it flows quite nicely, so YES.

WHAT WAS THAT
Five pages of 'just banter' between the two leads that irritated me as there was no plot set up. I hate banter masquerading as sitcom. Then there was blowjob gags. Why are there so many sex gags in Sitcom Trials entries. Just didn't really find it interesting after that. (There really is a lot of knocking on doors when there's a Halloween theme, isn't there? Not your fault I know...) But it's a NO from me.

Dan

Halftime vote count

I've totted up the votes so far, in the Halloween Sitcom Trials script selection, and it really is all to play for.

So far we have one script taking a lead on 15 points, and a script bringing up the rear on minus 13 points, but with only 13 sets of votes to go on, that could all change. (And one of those voters did only read, review and vote on 3 of the 28 scripts in contention, while all the other script readers managed to read every script.) So if you want to have a disproportionate effect on the results, and skew the figures by only managing to read a few of the entries in contention, go on. That's how we designed it, and that's what we're ready for. Bring it on.

Also, if you wrote a script, do please vote too. We count the votes keeping your vote for your own script separate. For the record, so far this time round, every writer has given their own script a Yes vote (worth 2 points). The winning script hasn't even been voted for by its own author, so there. (Maybe votes are worth 1 point and No votes are worth minus 1 point, for the record).

Keep those votes coming, you have till midnight to make a difference.

Kev F
Executive Producer
The Sitcom Trials

(Votes counted so far from: Ian Keiller, Garry Lee, Frantically, RedZed, Shahanshahan, Trinder, Scott Thomspon, Kev F, Joe King, Eoin Carney, Zoo2000, Robinusto, Spiggle, Dan Swerytd)

Read the scripts here: http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/SitsVac/files/Halloween%20Sitcom%20Trials%20Oct%2012/

And post your votes here on the forum, giving a Yes, a Maybe or a No vote, and adding a Twitter-length review to every sitcom you've read.

Deadline is midnight Saturday, after which the Bristol team will select their scripts for a reading on Sunday. (Further voting will be invited later for the Manchester show).

Kev F

Country Rock - Halloween Special: There was some funny dialogue here. I especially loved the "vampire zombie ninjas." However, I'm not seeing the real conflict - I never believed there were zombies, nor did the characters, for the most part. NO

Café Rico: This one was really creepy. It didn't get started until around page 9, though. There was a lot of rambling dialogue that could easily make an audience member turn away and miss the pay off at the end. MAYBE

Blackstable - Halloween: This one kept me wanting to read more to find out what happens next. There were a lot of funny scenes, including the crystal ball scene. This has potential. YES

A Womb with a View to Kill: This one deals with way too much: demon baby, ghost baby, Hitler baby, time travel. I wanted the writer to pick one and stick with it. NO

13 Gormley Street: Really funny. This was cleanly written and I liked the characters. The husband and wife team are believable and quirky. The neighbor is also well drawn. YES

Who Judges the Judges: Clever and funny. This one lost me when the LAD came in to the scene, and it got a little too long at the end. The twist was cliché. I really liked the last line, though. YES

Draszic's Lot: Witty dialogue here. I enjoyed this world of draculas with a modern family dynamic. It had a lot of appeal, but the structure was underdeveloped, and I'm not sure I liked the ending. MAYBE

Enter Twineman: This one went on a long time setting up the scene and providing the reader with information - there were long lines of dialogue without jokes. NO

Femme Fatale: It took too long to figure out where this was going, and the jokes were not funny to me. NO

Friends Like These: I like the set up, but then it becomes too predictable. NO

Graves End Health Spa: The puns were silly, but it was too clever by half. There was too much to wade through: accents, strange characters, confusing dialogue. NO

Twilight of the Bone Idle: This one was very conscious of itself as a writing contest entry. NO

Kill Bob: This one had me interested and wanting to find out what happened. I was a bit disappointed at what happened, though, so I felt like the payoff was weak. MAYBE

Purgatory: I couldn't get into this one for some reason. NO

Randolph Carter's Casebook: This one made me laugh out loud more than once. It was witty with thorough character development. YES

Red Sky at Night: The plot confused me so I couldn't get into this one. NO

Roy Richards: Lethal Gardner: Yes, of course. The funniest one by far. YES

Separate Parents: This was well written and funny, but the conception was mediocre. MAYBE

Storm in a Tea Cup: I was not liking this one - it was a little confusing and unbalanced. NO

The Brides of Pete-Enstein: Funny. Scary. Weird. Too predictable, though, and a little too disappointing at the end. NO

The Centipede Human: I couldn't really get into this one. NO

Ghost Partner: I couldn't get into this one either. NO

Lord Mayor: Trick but no Treat: I had no idea what this was about; perhaps the dialogue was too long. NO

The Scare Room: I kept waiting for laugh lines. It was not funny enough, but it had potential. NO

The Witching Hour: I did not get into the dialogue in this one. NO

Three Husbands and a Vicar: Disturbing, so not funny to me. NO

Trick or Treat: I could not get into this one. NO

Three in Tow: Funny! I was haunted by Patrick Swayze last night! YES

What was That?: This one took too long to get into. NO

Keep those votes coming. Just the one set of votes that came in from Simone since I posted the half-time figures has made a difference to the table. As well as increasing the goal difference - we now have a clear leader on 16 points and a script bringing up the rear on minus 14 - it's all to play for to end up in the Top Five (the scripts from which the Bristol group will choose their selection to read tomorrow - there will be time for further voting to help Manchester decide afterwards).

With the leaders on 16 and 13, we currently have 3 scripts with 10 points apiece, with one on 9, one on 8, two on 6, and others coming up on the inside.

A YES vote scores 2 points, a MAYBE scores 1 point, and a NO vote scores minus 1 point. So it would only take the votes of two people to totally change the Top Five line-up.

As always please read, review and vote on as many of the scripts as you can (but you do not need to do them all, we realise how tight time is). Don't post votes without reviews, that might look like you hadn't read them all.

Thanks in anticipation.

Kev F
Exec Producer
The Sitcom Trials

PS: In response to this question on the Sits Vac forum:

Can I ask if the number of votes for each entry can be published as well please?

The table of votes for the last Manchester Trials voting is already up there: http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/SitsVac/files/Sitcom%20Trials%20Manchester%20July%202012/

When the final voting deadline for this round is over I shall be posting the table for all these votes cast.

Sorry this has taken me so long, I wanted to re-read the 'no's to make sure. Thanks to all who've voted for mine and said nice things. Here are my votes:-

Who Judges The Judges - NO - I tried to read this three times but found the dense dialogue and no movement in the story in the first 5 pages very hard work. I think I can see what you were trying to write, and there could be a clever idea in there somewhere, but it's currently buried.

13 Gormley Street - MAYBE - Some nice laughs "Why should I treat her differently just because she's a murderer? She can have potato salad and quiche like everyone else." Not personally my cup of tea but very good.

A Womb With A View To A Kill - NO - Laughed, even at the character names, and "Breast is best" was very clever, but you lost me at "magic jizz" (...and after I made it through "Twat like raw stir-fry" too).

Blackstable - NO - At page 9 still no discernible story just lots of talking back and forth and sorry but not a single laugh from me. I skimmed to the end and still no story or laughs for me personally.

Café Rico - YES - I enjoyed reading this. "Are octopuses orange?" nice laugh to start on & lovely lines "Tarot cards are not an exact science". I did feel it could do with a trim in places but overall I enjoyed it and thought there were some clever bits of dialogue.

Country Rock - MAYBE - This felt a bit like a fun episode of Emmerdale, but sorry not enough proper laughs for me personally. Though I did really like "scientifically vampires are zombies" "Scientifically?!" so I'm giving it a maybe based on that.

Draszic's Lot - YES - Mine. I hinted in my cast list that the two voiceover parts could be read by one actor, and thought I was being clever ...obviously not.

Enter Twineman - NO - "just a particularly aggressive corduroy" is genius, but the story is too patchy for me, was looking forward to finding out what the Master "moooon" thing was about but it doesn't resolve. Strong laughs when they arrive, beautiful language but too disjointed.

Femme Fatale - NO - Felt very Allo-Allo but not in a good way sorry. If the words "Renault Twingo" can't save it, it can't be saved. The story is mad and the characters are odd, which can work but do not on this occasion for me.

Friends Like These - NO - A lot of extra dialogue could be cut from this without losing the story. There were some funny moments but they were rarely part of the story, so it felt like it took ages for the plot to move along.

Istanbul - NO - Liked the idea of the skull talking but found it very hard to follow what was happening.

Kill Bob - NO - I liked "I could do my hair. It is getting a bit curly" best, liked the characters too, but not much happens til the cliffhanger and then it goes a bit weird. To be fair, it's a difficult situation to set up quickly without props or costume, and I did like the premise.

Purgatory - MASSIVE YES - Very funny. Purgatory being navigated by popularity and profile is a lovely satire on current celebrity. Loved Jim and his exaggerations. Characters were very clearly defined. Difficult plot explained so neatly and concisely. ...I wish I'd written it.

Randolph Carter's Casebook - MAYBE - Not my cup of tea, but I really liked the lines "portrayed by David Suchet or Basil Rathbone" and "Literally Fishy" so much that I couldn't give it a no.

Red Sky At Night - NO - Not enough laughs for me sorry. The story was gently amusing but the characters weren't to my taste.

Roy Richards Lethal Gardener - NO - Not enough laughs for me sorry. Liked the idea of a guy who was superstitious married to a realist, and the characters were clearly drawn and original but the story didn't hold my interest.

Separate Parents - YES - I love arguing couples and incompetent authority figures and it was very Halloweeny. Both clever and funny. A few people mentioned 'staging issues' but I can't see a problem as all relevant action is mentioned perfectly in the dialogue so doesn't need to be 'seen'.

Storm In A Tea Cup - NO - The dialogue was very dense in patches, maybe laughs were there but were completely hidden by this. It reminded me of 'Time Gentlemen Please' in the more readable areas, but sorry too confused and jumbled in style and content.

The Brides Of Pete-enstein - YES - Very funny. Characters immediately clear. Not strictly a sitcom, but perfect for a one-off and live Halloween special.

The Centipede-Human - NO - Unusual and interesting idea, but dialogue was very dense and lost me I'm afraid. I couldn't follow what was happening.

The Ghost Partner - Couldn't read as .docx - sorry will try to open it on another computer before the deadline.

The Lord Mayor - NO - Dialogue was very clunky to read. Also, format and spelling didn't help.

The Scare Room - NO - I know you were going for gender-neutral from your cast list but as others have said FM1 & FM2 genuinely made it hard to read. Also seemed very short? Liked the idea of death etc as potential flat-mates and some nice laughs from that but not enough.

The Witching Hour - NO - Easy to read and lots of small funnies but only a few very funny lines ("Excellent! I have jars"). Great as a series of sketches, but I didn't enjoy the characters and because I could see where it was going my interest dipped half-way.

Three Ex Husbands and A Vicar - NO - Some funny lines and felt a bit Psychoville, but quite long dialogue for a stage sitcom. It's hard though with a complex story to fit in both the information to set it up and the laughs - especially in a short time with no props.

Three In Tow - YES - The premise was original and it was consistently funny, and both fun and an easy read.

Trick Or Treat - NO - I didn't relate to any of the characters (and a bit overly f**king sweary for me). Funny in patches but not for me. Like your name though!

What Was That? - NO - A few nice lines obscured by cruder stuff that's not as funny. Have more confidence in your cleverer lines ("The Wotsits, listen.") and chop the rest out to get the story moving sooner. I've been given this advice myself in the past so it comes from a warm place (...not a fart gag).

To anyone I've given a 'no' to, please don't be disheartened by anything I've said. I could be a complete knob for all you know, so these things mean very little.

To anyone I've given a 'yes' to, I want to assure you that I know exactly what I'm talking about, and have almost a 'second sight' about these kinds of things.

To all who I gave a 'maybe' to, you'll probably find it easiest to see that I probably am a bit of a knob with delusions of second-rate psychic powers.

Good luck to all.