If non participants are allowed to chip in. I wouldn't neg crit anyone's scripts. So a yes from me to Art for Arts sake and Not At the Allotment and a maybe to all the rest. I think a bit more business in most would help. And more narrative drive. Good luck to all.
Alright, here are my votes:
A Fish Tale
NO Not much funny around and not a particularly interesting setup.
Animal Something
YES Hell yes. Don't know exactly how you can make a whole series out of it,
but really funny.
Apocalyptic Cake Sale
YES My script. I obviously like it, otherwise I wouldn't already be working on
the follow up.
Art for Art Sake
YES Well written and could work really well on stage.
As Plain As Day
MAYBE Nicely done, but doesn't go all the way it could.
Doing it for the kids
YES Nice character and a bit of fun.
Love Bites
NO Didn't do anything for me. Sorry.
Leaping Tiger
MAYBE Not my cup of tea, but nicely done.
Job Club
No Wasn't working for me, far too many characters.
Not at the Allotment
MAYBE Not bad, but not much of a cliffhanger.
Stepping Stone
NO Not much going on and the characters didn't come to life for me
Taking of Peckham 123
MAYBE A few good gags, but rather topical jokes piled up than a sitcom.
Tallent Spotters
NO Liked it but too short and more of a sketch.
The Mad Axe-Man and Her
MAYBE Not bad, but in need of cliffhanger.
The Tragic Life of Roger Bulwark
YES Liked it. Not the most original set up but well done.
Wednesday-Thursday Club
NO Too many characters and the "Wednesday club is on Thursday and we don't get
pissed" joke is repeated over and over.
Quote: Marc P @ October 5 2011, 12:58 PM BSTIf non participants are allowed to chip in. I wouldn't neg crit anyone's scripts. So a yes from me to Art for Arts sake and Not At the Allotment and a maybe to all the rest. I think a bit more business in most would help. And more narrative drive. Good luck to all.
Thanks for these votes but, strictly, I can't accept "Maybe to all the rest", or rather can't give every other script the requisite 1 point on that basis. Without individual reviews as asked for, no-one can be sure the scripts have all been read. So I'll happily add the points for the two Yes votes for the scripts you named, but the other scripts will have their scores unchanged. I hope you'll agree that's fair.
You'll be delighted to find I am including the minus points that my two entries have accrued so far, even though a number of voters have made it clear they're only giving them No votes because they're entries by me and not on the quality of the scripts themselves. Nothing if not fair.
Kev F
Thats fine by me. I read them all but didn't feel it appropriate to specifically comment. I' prefer a system where by people voted for the four scripts they wanted to see/ get done rather than vote out others. And a negative vote for me is not really an option.
Quote: Marc P @ October 5 2011, 3:18 PM BSTThats fine by me. I read them all but didn't feel it appropriate to specifically comment. I' prefer a system where by people voted for the four scripts they wanted to see/ get done rather than vote out others. And a negative vote for me is not really an option.
I understand your reasoning, and very early on in the Sitcom Trials we tried that method of voting. But, mathematically, without the corrective of a negative vote, the votes were skewed in favour of the scripts that had been voted on most often, (which is frequently the first ones in alphabetical order by the way). So a No vote is necessary for this form of voting.
Another means of staying nice to everyone would be to email your votes directly to me. I'm less fond of this, simply because if I don't publish all the votes then I could be accused of making them up, whereas if everyone can see them as they come in... blah blah transparency blah blah. But it is an option if anyone wishes. When I announce the totals I would then either declare how many sets of votes had come in from reviewers who wished to remain anonymous, or publish their votes anonymously, whichever I have time for.
Also someone has uploaded their votes as a file to the Files area. This is an option should anyone wish.
Quote: Kev F @ October 5 2011, 3:38 PM BSTAnother means of staying nice to everyone would be to email your votes directly to me.
I suggested this in an earlier post...
I can understand why people don't like voting as who is anyone to give someone else a no vote, but I think as long as the criticism is constructive it is good, the sitcom trials usp is the open access review system and the few reviews I have already read for my script will help me in the future,
I have enjoyed reviewing the scripts and hope to post my reviews tomorrow when I finish reading the last few
Quote: Kev F @ October 5 2011, 3:12 PM BSTa number of voters have made it clear they're only giving them No votes because they're entries by me and not on the quality of the scripts themselves. Nothing if not fair.
Kev F
Hope you aren't taking it personally Kev; it's not because they're by you, but because they're scripts that have already been given performance time and more in-depth feedback than the other pieces entered. I, and presumably others, were very much thinking about being fair
The person who voted on yahoo seems to have given feedback on a piece I haven't seen that isn't with the rest of the files- is there somewhere else I should be looking?
Also, the late entry- will you be asking everyone who's voted to adapt their posts/files so that the points system isn't awry?
There are votes springing up all over the shop. Bart has voted on the Sitsvac forum, but hasn't included reviews. Kev, could you let him know? He might listen to you.
I've just done my first adding up of votes, ticking off the votes from Debbie Oz, Bart Hulley (no reviews), RedZed333, AJGO, Spiggle, Evertsen, Evan Rubivellian, Kev F, Marc P (2 votes only), Vic Gore, and we're getting a marvellous spread of votes. Almost every script has at least one Yes, a Maybe and a No, showing quite the diversity of tastes, and we have some frontrunners starting to emerge. At the top of the table two scripts already have 13 points each, and at the bottom one has managed to reach minus 5. But it's early days yet, every single vote can make a difference to whose work is likely to get performed as part of the Manchester Comedy Festival in a few week's time.
Bring on those votes folks, deadline is Saturday.
Scripts at: http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/SitsVac/files/-%20Sitcom%20Trials%20-%20Manchester%20Oct%2021%202011/
Post your votes and reviews here.
No, yes, no, no, no, maybe, yes, no, never in a million years, no, yes and no, maybe, maybe not.
I'll do the rest later if I have time.
Quote: Badge @ October 5 2011, 9:57 PM BSTNo, yes, no, no, no, maybe, yes, no, never in a million years, no, yes and no, maybe, maybe not.
I'll do the rest later if I have time.
Ha ha League of Gentlemen.
Seriously though, are you going to vote properly? We value your custom.
Give me a break Kev, I've only reviewed one so far.
It is a lovely irony that I introduced the online peer-review system of voting so that I wouldn't ever have to read a big pile of sitcom scripts, then stopped doing the Sitcom Trials largely because of the amount of time it was taking up, and here I am greatly enjoying reading and reviewing the scripts that are coming in to the latest Manchester Trials, and am getting the biggest thrill from, of all thing, counting up the scores.
Having just added up another set of scores and amended the running total, I am delighting in the way every vote can make such a dramatic difference, with every Yes vote suddenly boosting a script by 2 points, and every No dragging it back by one. At the top of the table we now have a script with 15 points, and bringing up the rear another script with minus 6. And that will, of course, all change. (Just 3 Yes votes would pull everyone out of minus figures, though it will now take 15 No votes to drag that leader completely down to earth).
The diversity of opinions really does make one worry about the usual situation where your work will be rejected by just one script reader or editor. In practice, I think, the BBC get three people to read a script before making a final decision, though often it can be just one person's opinion that lets the script get that far.
I fully appreciate the difference between an experienced, trained or professional script reader, who knows how to read and judge a script properly, and someone who may be speed-reading, just picking out gags they like, or making their decisions on a dozen other spurious bases. But a large part of any reader's judgement, whether in the Sitcom Trials' amateur realm or in the professional world of TV and radio, is going to be subjective. After all, even once a sitcom hits the screen it can divide viewers. I've had recent conversations with people who in turn love or loathe Miranda, Gary Tank Commander, My Family and Fresh Meat (yes, it is possible for someone to not like Fresh Meat) and it's quite possible all comedy is Marmite. Certainly this round of Sitcom Trials voting suggests the 18 scripts in contention very much fall into the Marmite category, every one of them having received at least one damning No Vote, a Maybe and a Yes vote from someone.
So carry on enjoying your power, Sitcom Trials readers. Every opinion matters and I like to think we're all learning something along the way.
Read the scripts at: http://tv.groups.yahoo.com/group/SitsVac/files/-%20Sitcom%20Trials%20-%20Manchester%20Oct%2021%202011/
Post your reviews and votes here.
Quote: Badge @ October 5 2011, 10:31 PM BSTGive me a break Kev, I've only reviewed one so far.
Dan