There's been a lot mentioned about the workshops and I'd like to add this.
As I said, I attended one in Manchester before the last comp. It was an amazing experience and I did learn a lot, so they are well worth attending.
After that workshop, I rewrote my sitcom using what I had learned [but still didn't know it all] and resubmitted it. It wasn't shortlisted. After the workshop ended, two of the actors came to me and said, they'd liked mine best of all, liked acting in it and found it to be the funniest. So fully confident with that, I rewrote. In doing so though, I felt the need to insert another scene but needed three more characters [set in a pub] I think that was my downfall as no actor wants to do a few lines, rehearsing, travelling to those rehearsals etc and not being given many lines to say.
I was gutted not to be shortlisted but blamed myself not Simon and Declan and just took it that there is far more talent out there than any of us could imagine.
and ...er...I'm not one of them.

http://www.passingcloudsholidayhomes.com/

Click this! You'll never look a yodelling bailiff in the eye again.

And it was a good script, too.

Quote: Griff @ March 16 2011, 11:07 AM GMT

http://www.zazzle.co.uk/fishfinger+hats

View original

hardly the same thing, but if you want to be pedantic (which God knows, I do)

http://www.google.co.uk/#sclient=psy&hl=en&q=fish+finger+helmet&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=889b1624b986748d

Quote: evertsen @ March 16 2011, 11:43 AM GMT

Yes, I think it's important to be true to thine own self, yet a handicap if popular taste of the moment is at odds with your concepts. I do think if you believe in your work and the message you want to convey, then keep hammering at the door till someone opens it.
Great competition, once again. Looking forward to next year.

View original

Spot on. Plus it is really hard to write well something in which you don't believe. Some can do it, but it is difficult and probably eats your soul. I'm sure if I tried to write an episode of Two Pints It would be even worse than...no, wait. Bad example.

Quote: Deferenz @ March 16 2011, 2:33 AM GMT

I have just read this entire thread from beginning to end in one go.

View original

You soft-headed c**t!

Quote: bushbaby @ March 16 2011, 11:51 AM GMT

There's been a lot mentioned about the workshops and I'd like to add this.
As I said, I attended one in Manchester before the last comp. It was an amazing experience and I did learn a lot, so they are well worth attending.
After that workshop, I rewrote my sitcom using what I had learned [but still didn't know it all] and resubmitted it. It wasn't shortlisted. After the workshop ended, two of the actors came to me and said, they'd liked mine best of all, liked acting in it and found it to be the funniest. So fully confident with that, I rewrote. In doing so though, I felt the need to insert another scene but needed three more characters [set in a pub] I think that was my downfall as no actor wants to do a few lines, rehearsing, travelling to those rehearsals etc and not being given many lines to say.
I was gutted not to be shortlisted but blamed myself not Simon and Declan and just took it that there is far more talent out there than any of us could imagine.
and ...er...I'm not one of them.

View original

Oh, I've no doubt they're worth attending! As I said above, I think Simon and Declan are people who know what they're talking about and they can only help and improve scripts.

I think you'd be surprised at what actors are willing to do for no money in all honesty.

As for your last bit... seriously - thirty two out of 1800 is a tiny amount. Top two per cent as I said earlier. No one should view this as a categorical proof of inability, especially given the notes about different comps having different responses to the same material and the subjective nature of comedy. If two actors liked your script best, then maybe it's worth sticking with?

Quote: Declan @ March 15 2011, 6:32 PM GMT

...

2) We don't do comedy by quotas or box-ticking. The reason why we only picked eight women writers is because women aren't in the slightest bit funny and those we did pick are actually men writing under female pseudonyms.

3) I wrote 2) above, because I am the funniest person in the country.

View original

Not that I find it funny, but I will remember what you said about women writers!

Quote: JJ Cocker @ March 16 2011, 12:00 PM GMT

Not that I find it funny, but I will remember what you said about women writers!

View original

I took it to be Declan's sense of humour

Quote: simon wright @ March 15 2011, 8:02 PM GMT

We didn't speed-read the good ones. We savoured those.

How much time a reader spends on your script is entirely in your hands. Give him a hook, an interesting premise, original characters and at least a couple of laughs in the first two pages and he'll take his time over it.

I did.

The result of a lottery is out of your hands, the result of writing contest is very much under your control.

View original

Woah there, Speedy, no need to go all passive-aggressive on me! My post was merely trying to put into context not getting through. Ie., it's not the end of the world and doesn't mean you or your entry is complete shite. By all means, write something else, improve what you've written etc., just don't endlessly flagellate yourself on here.

Quote: bushbaby @ March 15 2011, 7:38 PM GMT

I feel a little guilty here because it was me that mentioned the number of men as opposed to women on the short list. I just thought it interesting and then Simon or Declan said, only about a third of the entries were written by women.

View original

Don't feel guilty. Talent shouldn't be viewed upon, or justified against gender. When it comes to creative pursuits, it almost invariable comes down to personal preference in those making final judgements.

Egos may occassionaly prey on stereotypical insecurities, but if you're passionate about your art... well, what can I say, follow your dreams and find out where you land, bushbaby. )

Quote: Griff @ March 16 2011, 11:07 AM GMT

http://www.zazzle.co.uk/fishfinger+hats

View original

For almost one second I thought that said 'razzle.co.uk' and my mouse began to tremble....

I'm running out of platitudes but....

Hendrix didn't just pick up a guitar one day and thrash out Purple Haze on a whim. He had to snap strings, piss off the neighbours and throw it on the floor in frustration for a long while beforehand.

Quote: sean knight @ March 16 2011, 12:15 PM GMT

I'm running out of platitudes but....

Hendrix didn't just pick up a guitar one day and thrash out Purple Haze on a whim. He had to snap strings, piss off the neighbours and throw it on the floor in frustration for a long while beforehand.

View original

I'm not sure what your point is here. You seem to be saying that apart from those picked nobody had spent any time or years or whatever learning/honing their craft. I suspect Simon and Declan are still doing that themselves, that this process is just as much a part of a learning process for them as well. I am sure lot of people who have entered have spent years on the process, likewise this won't have been their first stab or their last.
There is an awful lot of science in music, not so much in Sitcom. The craft can be taught, but the art... well now, that's a kettle of a different fish. And luck/timing plays a huge part in everything to do with sitcom I reckon. Mainly bad. SOmetimes good.

Quote: Marc P @ March 16 2011, 11:19 AM GMT

The person who is responsible for a script being rejected is the person rejecting it. There may be contributory factors that helped them make that decision. You can only do what you can do before you send it off. And you are right, you should make it as good as you possibly can before doing so. But you can't make someone like something. I don't think anyone should beat themselves up because they didn't get picked if they seriously made an effort, and I don't think anybody should be beating up Declan and Simon either... well maybe Simon. At the end of the day WordGirl, it's an art not a science. One man's Jackson Pollock is another man's load of bollocks. Sometimes it's good to have Art for Art's Sake.

View original

Hi Marc P - wasn't suggesting that people beat themselves up. That would be silly, and very difficult. Merely suggesting people should try harder, and keep re-writing etc rather than blame the readers. I do disagree though about who is ultimately responsible for a script or an idea being rejected, but that's just a personal opinion and how I choose to view my work's progress. I think a writer's fate is in their own hands. I've worked in TV as a Producer and in programme development, and always loved picking something up which compelled me to read on and made me passionate enough to want to make it happen. I think achieving that effect involves a mix of sheer talent and the methodical way writers approach each project/ competition etc. You're right in what you say... writing is an artform, but one I think you can approach scientifically to maximise your chances of success. If you know your target audience and what they're looking for, and you give it to them, then you make it very tough for them to reject it.

Like I say, running out of platitudes.
My point is kind of you have to learn a lot as well. There is a lot of science in music, true, but raw talent has a lot to do with it as well.

John Frusciante (on off guitarist with the Red Hot Chili Peppers) worded it quite well when he talked about musicians that didn't want to learn theory and just feel the music. Like they didn't want to be able to talk to people just rub their penis on them. He wanted to be able to talk to people and rub his penis on them.

I know I can be funny. I've also been known to string a sentence together on occasion but if I could rustle up the funding to go to a workshop and learn the theory I'd be there in a heartbeat. At the minute I'm looking after two babies, struggling with a mortgage and battling to get a job in an area where there are 19 applicants per vacancy.