Does anyone fancy taking a look at my sitcom script? It's not very long.
It's my first attempt at writing for the stage/screen. I'm aware that the formatting is somewhat erratic and there may be some mistakes in there. I wrote it over the last three days, so it is a first draft. So obviously it's very rough around the edges.
Any comments/feedback appreciated.
PS. And yes I'm aware that the title is a bit similar to Peep Show. It's merely a working title.
Quote: morgills1 @ December 31 2009, 12:03 AM GMTDoes anyone fancy taking a look at my sitcom script? It's not very long.
It's my first attempt at writing for the stage/screen. I'm aware that the formatting is somewhat erratic and there may be some mistakes in there. I wrote it over the last three days, so it is a first draft. So obviously it's very rough around the edges.
Any comments/feedback appreciated.
PS. And yes I'm aware that the title is a bit similar to Peep Show. It's merely a working title.
I found this very funny but the f**k word is really only funny when it's used frugally, there's too many F words and swear words. I did laugh out loud on some lines but to me it's not sitcom format which is a beginning a muddle [middle] and an end. Therefore this , to me, is a piece of comedy writing not sitcom which should have a storyline.
It is good/funny though and quite different than any I've read. The sitcom mission also say they don't want child actors.
good luck with it
Firstly, thank you for taking the time to read and comment. I really appreciate it as someone with no previous experience or basically any clue what I'm doing.
As for the swearing, I completely understand that some people prefer less of it, or even none. However I wrote this with the intention of having naturalistic dialogue. I've based some of it on my own experiences - and people in jobs like this do swear quite a bit. I certainly haven't been as liberal in my use of swear words as The Thick of It! I haven't really used swearing for comedic effect - it's more to punctuate certain bits of dialogue and to lend it an authenticity.
I think you're right about the child - I did hesitate when I wrote that first. I think I will remove that part before I submit - leaving it with just the cast of four.
And yeah, it basically does lack a story. Can't disagree with that. I don't have the time to get a proper one sorted, but it's definitely a legitimate criticism.
Could you be more specific about the parts you found funny? And are there any particular parts you found badly written or unfunny?
Hey, found lots of this funny, but do have to agree that the swearing isn't great, and I mean that with reference to something like The Thick of It. In your script it doesn't make lines funnier unless the point is they just keep doing it, I think a lot of the time you've used fvcking to make the intonation of the line sound right and to give emphasis to the final word. For instance with the line:
Look love, if I had a medicine degree I wouldn't be working in a fvcking supermarket would I?
It could sound alright (not saying funnier per se) saying:
Look love, if I had a medical degree I wouldn't be working in this supermarket would I?
Or
Look love, if I had a bloody medical degree I wouldn't be working in a bloody supermarket would I?
Maybe that's not the voice you want the character to have, but often I found the swearing in this more aggressive than funny. And believe me aggression can be funny, citing 2 of my favourite sitcom characters here: Victor Meldrew and Malcolm Tucker.
Just my two pennies' worth. Good luck!
Quote: Elise B @ December 31 2009, 3:03 AM GMTHey, found lots of this funny, but do have to agree that the swearing isn't great, and I mean that with reference to something like The Thick of It. In your script it doesn't make lines funnier unless the point is they just keep doing it, I think a lot of the time you've used fvcking to make the intonation of the line sound right and to give emphasis to the final word. For instance with the line:
Look love, if I had a medicine degree I wouldn't be working in a fvcking supermarket would I?
It could sound alright (not saying funnier per se) saying:
Look love, if I had a medical degree I wouldn't be working in this supermarket would I?
Or
Look love, if I had a bloody medical degree I wouldn't be working in a bloody supermarket would I?
Maybe that's not the voice you want the character to have, but often I found the swearing in this more aggressive than funny. And believe me aggression can be funny, citing 2 of my favourite sitcom characters here: Victor Meldrew and Malcolm Tucker.
Just my two pennies' worth. Good luck!
I think for that particular line it is funnier with the swear word. You were right when you said that I used it to make the intonation of the line right and give emphasis to a particular word.
I will review my use of swearing, but I feel the one you quoted is justified and makes the line funnier (even though it's admittedly not a hilarious line).
Hiya - I took a quick look.
I have to agree re swearing - fine in stand up but rare on TV sitcoms. Yes, they get away with it on the Thick of It but they had a fair bit of clout between them already and its done in a funny way not just for emphasis.
I get what you're saying that it's natural in the 'real world' but if you are a new writer I think you're unnecessarily going to alienate a few potential producers to start with. As already pointed out you can get emphasis without it.
On the plus side a few bits made me laugh eg
1
SID:
(Pause) And excuse me, the minimum wage for workers over the age of 22 is £5.80 an hour. I think you'll find that I'm (points in her face) on £5.95 an
hour.
(Sid awaits a retort from Cat. When he doesn't get one he says smugly, pointing in her face again)
You've embarrassed yourself.
[Although I'd emphasise that bit eg What you've done there is embarrass yourself.]
-o-
2
CAT:
No it wasn't that. I'm not as shallow as you. We just grew apart.
SID:
I have literally no idea what that means.
One last thing - you do have quite a few long speeches - possibly I go too far the other way but it's generally better to keep dialogue shorter and punchier as far as possible. No doubt there are exceptions though.
JP
I've taken out about half the swearing based on what you've all said. I really do feel it's justified in certain sections...
As for the "you've embarrased yourself" line, I'm quite fond of it. However, I do have to admit, I shamelessly stole it. It's something one of my housemates constantly says whenever someone makes the smallest of mistakes (e.g. if someone puts sugar in someone's tea when they didn't want any he'll go, "You've embarrassed yourself").
Interesting you find the "I have no idea what that means" line amusing, it doesn't strike me as one of the better lines.
Never fails to tickle me.
And yeah the long passages of dialogue, I need to cut down on them. I've broken a few down by having a character interrupt the one speaking with a question or comment. Hopefully that'll address it.
What do people feel about the soliloquies? Given that the show is centered around the character of Sid I've kind of used them with the intention of enabling the audience to learn more about him.
Hi morgills,
Had a quick read through and I found it to be quite funny. Have to echo everyone else's thoughts - ill placed swear words, the kiddie wink and most of all, Sid going into huge paragraphs of speech.
Sid is a typical wise cracking, all knowing, jack the lad character, which is great, but without any kind of real flaw or weakness, it erodes any kind of sympathy or empathy I might have for the character. Basically, it makes it so you could care less whether he lives, dies, attains his dream or gets his leg over.
You've chosen a supermarket as your setting, which is great, but because the characters mainly talked about shagging the whole time, it could really have been set anywhere. If you have insider knowledge of working in a supermarket, then share it with the readers, let us feel that the place exists. Otherwise, choose a setting you are more familiar with.
As others have pointed out, I did find your jokes to be very funny but without a context, they can fall a bit flat. The funny lines have to come naturally from the characters and their situation, not just a continual 'set up / punchline' interchange.
Finally, because of the limited amount of characters and any kind of real plot, it began to get a bit samey - with Sid just making crude remarks and Cat remonstrating him for it. Until Vincent showed up and then it became just Sid making violent and crude remarks.
So in summary - cut the speeches, reduce the swearing, make the characters three dimensional and identifiable, make the setting three dimemsional and recognisable, put more effort into character rather then gag based comedy, ditch the kid and create a plot. How easy it that?
Now before you run off and celebrate the New Year by taking a bottle of pills, I did think your writing was very funny and showed great potential. So keep at it and bring me more, but better!
I chose a supermarket cos I did work at one! I think it's a pretty good setting for a sitcom, given the nature of the work and the relationships between the workers, bosses and most of all, the customers.
For instance, the story about the crisp woman is a heightened version of what actually happened to me one time. She did come back angrily to me with the packet she wanted. I didn't throw it in a child's face mind...
But yeah I think pretty much all your critique is spot on. Can't really argue much with it. Sadly...
Bear in mind however it was written for a competition in which the winning entries are done on stage - therefore I didn't have much freedom with which to draw the setting. It has to be a bare stage in fact - so even setting it where I did represents a bit of a challenge. The short length is another condition of entry, if I had more time to play with I feel the story would have worked better.
As for Sid not being flawed I would say he most definitely is - he's a drop-out with absolutely no ambition, a flagrant disregard for the feelings of others, and a bit clueless. And borderline misogynistic views. But I think he is somewhat sympathetic. Part of the reason why little attention is paid to the setting is because Sid isn't doing any work (and displays an intense disliking of doing so) - which the end line is meant to play on. That pay off could have been done better for sure, but that was the intention...
Quote: Renegade Carpark @ December 31 2009, 6:12 PM GMTSo in summary - cut the speeches, reduce the swearing, make the characters three dimensional and identifiable, make the setting three dimemsional and recognisable, put more effort into character rather then gag based comedy, ditch the kid and create a plot. How easy it that?
Now before you run off and celebrate the New Year by taking a bottle of pills, I did think your writing was very funny and showed great potential. So keep at it and bring me more, but better!
RC... let me comment that yours is a terrific critique.... both funny AND helpful. Another good example of why I keep coming back to this community of fine people. Happy New Year to you.
Thank you Blobster and a happy new year to you as well. I don't normally post much in Critique as it's cold and full of spiders.
If truth be told, I often write something that I can consider to be brilliant, show it to other, very knowledgeable people, who in turn criticise it. When I don't receive immediate praise and plaudits, I run off into the corner crying and rocking back and forth chanting 'What do they know? They think Gavin and Stacey is funny, the dumb bastards!'
But then I eventually crawl back to my keyboard, re-read it and realise that I have been a total bumper clot and the criticisms were right all along. I then re-write it and am usually suprised at just how much better it becomes as a result of the criticisms.
I hate 'dishing it out' and I certainly 'can't take it' but unfortunately, there is no other way to grow as a writer.
But if you practically beg people to criticise your work, then you better be prepard for some, er, criticism. So don't feel bad morgills, I feel the same way whenever someone calls my baby ugly - in a manner of speaking.
Only criticism I'd give of your feedback was that you commented that you found some of it "very funny" but not what parts...the other stuff, as I said was pretty much spot on.
edited
The script on the link now is an edited one, with less swearing and lengthy passages (still too much of that mind).
I found it surprisingly funny. I'm not sure if the other crits had read the version that I saw (you said that you updated it).
The characters did have some depth, in that I got a sense of who they were, and could anticipate their responses, and that's quite difficult to convey in a 15 minute pilot.
My only advice is DON'T listen to criticisms from women about anything related to comedy. It was mainly females that criticised you for putting "swear words" in your script. I thought that the swear words were necessary, not that they added to the comedy, but they made Sid's character more realistic. There is no way a man like that would say "bloody" or "flipping" instead of "f**king". What you have to ask yourself is: how many funny, actually funny, women are there in the comedy world.? The answer is of course zero. Have you ever found a female stand-up in any way funny? neither have I. I am not Sid, I love women, but whenever I see their lame jokes on TV (2 packets of lager, written by a woman. Miranda, written by...a woman (sort of) = I rest my case). Contemporary women are not creative, and have too many boundaries to be actually funny. They can do "silly" but not intelligent or self depricating humour. That is why their critiques will tend to advise you to clean up your language, or give your character a sympathetic side like Grace from Will and f'ing Grace. Again I use the proviso "contemporary" women, there have been creative women in the past, ones that weren't all about make up and heat mag, and didn't just tell jokes about men's fear of "commitment" and "periods".
Apologies, I digress. So to wrap this baby up:
1) I liked the fact that Sid was a solid character;
2) I liked the way that you used the setting, especially for the humiliation of Lidl boy (i got the impression that Sid came of as a bit of a hero there, saving his friend from a possessive ex, who looks like a reflection in a spoon)
and 3) I liked the creative jokes (the lock and key).
The only things that I didn't like (i'm a man of extremes, so I'm gonna say "hated") were the monologues. They work only when used as a narrators voice, but you didn't do that. In your script, the monologues were completely out of place, and the thought of Sid directly addressing the audience was just cringe worthy. This isn't f**king Shakespeare, and Shakespeare used such scenes only to let you know what was on the characters mind, and not as some sort of pantomime (i.e. Buttons (TURNS TO AUDIENCE) "Oh yes he did") or to pointlessly llabour a joke (Sid is direct, he doesn't need to go off screen). Peepshow's Mark is the opposite, and so the internal monologue tels you what he is really thinking (but niether he nor Jez "turn to audience" ooooh).
But in conclusion, better than my entry, which was about how men can't commit to relationships and are afraid of pre menstraul tension. You bastard. Good luck.