Very interesting Page 4
Because in effect I am saying that companies don't even read scripts but send stereotype replies.
But you wouldn't be saying that by reprinting the letters. Copyright infringement, perhaps. But not libel.
But it maybe they do read them but don't like the script/premise etc even though in this case it was an award winning sitcom.
As I implied above, I think this is more likely, simply because I've had several cases where I've sent a script out that clearly has been read. One to the degree of wanting to make it, and that's a fairly major company.
Certainly, your summary of their responses largely suggests they read it as they provide a detailed critique! There's no obligation to like a show/script just cos it's from an award winning show.
Actually, I'd be intrigued to know the names of the companies. Whether they actually have an unsolicited sub policy, that sort of thing.
How many brand new writers have got a sitcom on TV in the last decade?
How brand new is brand new? Do you mean people who haven't worked their way through sitcoms, building contacts? I don't think that's necessarily an issue, nobody denies it's a hard business to get into.
If not in terms of people without a sitcom credit, off the top of my head Jonathan Thake for the Persuasionists. Do the Phone Shop writers have credits? Emma Fryer and Home Time. I'm sure I could think of a few more with time.
It is lazy /safe casting and lazy/safe acceptance of scripts....by writers they know and are established. As I said, I'd rather now, concentrate on going on cruises.
I can sort of see where its coming from though. TV costs a lot. So you have to be absolutely 100% on a gamble. The others don't seem as much of a gamble, I'd guess.
Regardless, I know of several stuff commissioned or in development by quite big companies by writers you (and they) have never heard of. It does happen.
Quote: bushbaby @ July 7 2011, 11:49 PM BSTSorry to annoy you all. I'm out of here bye...but one last word, the business is still ...it's not what you know but who you know.....and I should know, but I've never used contacts as I would never know if I got there by contacts or talent.
It's useful to know people, yes. But you can't go far without some ability. It's what you know and who you know.
Fortunately, the people who make comedy are always very keen to find new people who have talent. So if you do 'know' what you're doing, it's very easy to get to know the people as well.
Quote: bushbaby @ July 7 2011, 11:47 PM BSTIt was an exercise a trial a test to satisfy myself that even an award winning sitcom doesn't get anywhere if you are a new writer....go figure. Had I signed it off as Alan Bennett or the likes, it would have been accepted straight off.
But as I've said - I'm a new writer with no real credits. And I've got one sitcom that has the interest of a big prod co. and a big broadcaster. How is that possible if the scenario you outline is true?
I don't mean to be harsh, as I'm all too aware it's a tricky business to get into. But I think your world view on this is edging too far towards the cynical. There are only so many times you can suggest companies don't read things, or that competition judges didn't read every entry...
Quote: bushbaby @ July 7 2011, 11:05 PM BSTMaybe because you are a professional?
That doesn't really make sense.
What I'm trying to get at that is episodes like this and the 'pinched ideas' thread are hardly the actions of sensible folk.
Quote: Ben @ July 8 2011, 7:56 AM BSTWhat I'm trying to get at that is episodes like this and the 'pinched ideas' thread are hardly the actions of sensible folk.
I think it's too easy to become obsessed with sitcom writing, and the idea that it's the be all and end all of everything. Which is a shame, as a lot of writers might have more success if they quit obsessing about such a tiny area. There's more to life than sitcom. Most of which are pretty forgettable anyway.
Quote: bushbaby @ July 7 2011, 11:49 PM BSTI do find it amazing though that I have tried to warn you all about the business but I have got shot down in flames. Carry on striving though....for nothing. Good luck.
Look.
Even on this board - a fairly limited selection of, in the main, amateur or semi-pro writers, there has been SOME sucess.
You're only wasting your time if your stuff's no good.
Course there's luck involved - and missed opportunities.
Of course contacts help.
But if you're work is getting rejected on a regular basis you'd be better off casting the critical eye over the work rather than the industry.
I strived for five years.
Now I'm getting somewhere.
If I'd got all huffy about my early failures I'd have got nowhere.
All this time spent brooding would be better spent writing.
Quote: chipolata @ July 8 2011, 9:44 AM BSTI think it's too easy to become obsessed with sitcom writing, and the idea that it's the be all and end all of everything. Which is a shame, as a lot of writers might have more success if they quit obsessing about such a tiny area. There's more to life than sitcom. Most of which are pretty forgettable anyway.
Very good point.
Plus, time spent within another writing discipline will only increase your ability when and if you have another pop at a sitcom.
An understanding of dramatic writing, for instance, is essential if you want to write anything more substantial than the 'Not Going Out's of this world.
And even they have a basic grasp of the structure of drama.
A writer writes - whatever that happens to be
Quote: Lazzard @ July 8 2011, 9:49 AM BSTBut if you're work is getting rejected on a regular basis you'd be better off casting the critical eye over the work rather than the industry.
By the same token, we shouldn't go too easy on the industry as they do produce an inordinate ammount of worthless crap.
Quote: chipolata @ July 8 2011, 9:54 AM BSTBy the same token, we shouldn't go too easy on the industry as they do produce an inordinate ammount of worthless crap.
But I don't think that can be soley blamed on people rejecting good stuff in favour of crap in their insatiable desire to put new writers down - as is implied in the OP.
There are all sort of other, more political, pressures that come into play.
In other words, when they turn down a script I think they're usually right.
I think it has been said before that simply sending stuff in is not good enough and never has been really. Unless the timing is right and Neptune is in the eighth house or somesuch.
And if the entire business is run by who know, then if you have contacts use them. It's only the first step of many many hurdles to get a chat with someone about a project.
BushBaby, why don't you send a copy of your sitcom to the same companies, if they send you the same replies pro forma then you have gone some way to validating your suspicions...
just ploughed through the thread and I find my self in the 'so what?' camp.
As an exercise it's not new. Mr Smith goes to Washington anyone?
And why pick a US script? The examples of UK to US format failures are legion.
But the cri de coeur of why can't I get published is understood. Many of us here have tried to varying degrees. I know I've ranted a lot about the unfairness of the business on this forum but equally I know my writing needs to be improved. I'm at least in a position of being a published author albeit as an academic so I know what it takes in terms of hitting deadlines, revising proofs and taking the sometimes vicious and viperative comments from anonymous reviewers (they make a certain contributor in critique look like an amateur) without tipping over into depression.
If the writing is good it's got a better chance of happening. So help it. Make it happen. If you believe in the work, find a local group to put it on, get in contact with performers who need material. Get your showcase. Push on doors. Use your contacts. Market yourself. You'll soon find out whether the script/book/article has got legs.
At least you got comments. Last thing I submitted, I was just told no thanks we've shredded it. So, you are ahead of the game on that front. You know what to do to revise your script. I have no idea what specifically was wrong with mine.
Quote: RedZed333 @ July 8 2011, 12:35 PM BSTBushBaby, why don't you send a copy of your sitcom to the same companies, if they send you the same replies pro forma then you have gone some way to validating your suspicions...
She has done. That's her entire point.
Quote: chipolata @ July 8 2011, 9:44 AM BSTI think it's too easy to become obsessed with sitcom writing, and the idea that it's the be all and end all of everything. Which is a shame, as a lot of writers might have more success if they quit obsessing about such a tiny area.
Considering that the longest threads on here are email opportunities-such as Newsjack, Radio Rejects, and Treason Show-writing a sitcom and sending it off in hard copy seems to have a better prospect of success.
Quote: don rushmore @ July 8 2011, 1:33 PM BSTShe has done. That's her entire point.
I meant her new one...
I don't think she has a new point unless I missed it?
Quote: Marc P @ July 8 2011, 2:21 PM BSTI don't think she has a new point unless I missed it?
