Tue, 2021-Sep-21 00:00 (BST)
I am not a coverage type of writer. That comes from a mixture of arrogance and knowledge that I don't write normal stories. Many people say coverage is a learning tool. Others say that it is a stage, something they do before sending their work out. People use coverage services for various reasons.
Is there a point (or was there for for you) when you no longer saw the need for coverage?
I'm reminded of the movie Hustle and Flow - Djay writes some lyrics which are harsh and Key looks at him and says something like you want radio play right? Then Shelby says something like it's like a club song. Point being what's acceptable in one area isn't in another but it seems that some people think they are the gatekeepers of what's acceptable even when they have no power (Key in this instance. He may be right, but he could also be wrong. He's just going on experience/what he thinks/ what he's heard it may or may not be valid), and since we don't know we assume they know what they are talking about because they are standing in front of us saying - you need to listen to me because I know.
I could write a 4 hour feature about a worm trying to get to a melted popsicle and everyone would say that's a bad idea and a complete waste of time until someone somewhere says "this is exactly what I've been looking for!"
I think people see less value the more experience they get.
Well, I think my experience on coverage is a bit different from the posts so far. I have found a coverage site that has repeatedly provided thoughtful, concrete, and highly actionable feedback over a couple of scripts. I say this because when the notes come back and I digest them, I know exactly what they are talking about as I felt it when I was writing it, but not sure it was fixable. What I have also found is that if you can ask for the same reader, the feedback gets even better as they now know the story, are vested a bit more, and dive a bit deeper.
For me, finding the "right" coverage group can yield a much better story; which equates to a better chance of not hitting the trash bin after page 1. However, my max is 3 coverage feedbacks, and only if I am getting a CONSIDER or RECOMMEND.
I have to add to my previous comment. I use coverage quite a bit... but... Exec A can love it then Exec B can write notes like, "if this were an amateur script I would rate it much higher, but since you write many scripts, I have to grade it on a pro basis". Uh, what? If I were a pro I wouldn't be using coverage on your site to get feedback. Sometimes it simply depends on the reader's mood. This Exec wrote a long, long explanation of how crappy the story was, and so on. For reference, that same script got a Recommend and a Consider from two other Execs. Again, find a service that gives you actionable feedback that HELPS you analyze YOUR script. What you do with it is up to you, but despite the one-offs that we're having a bad day, I still believe it helps me as a writer to improve, if not strengthen my Teflon body armor!
I know we don't have the power to do this. But I would love to be able to stop people from calling themselves Execs. In the corporate world is means something (not as much as it used to admittedly). But in the Government (NSW Australia) You have the Minister, His Secretary, Dep Secretary, then Executive Directors. These people are called the Executive Level.
These people if they were actual executives would be earning hundreds of thousands of dollars and not spending their time give notes.
I know I am becoming an angry old man on this topic. But I would love to ask them and executive for what corporation and just how big this corporation is.
Clark, his comment to me cries out conman. He should be reading the work, not the person. What I am hearing is, "if you were an amateur I would be more encouraging so you will keep paying me".
Clark, that's...a weird way of saying, I expect better from a complete stranger online. Odd.
Craig, I hear ya, I do. Americanisms. Grain of salt an all that. Film execs in the US, for online script coverage for some, not all, websites, just means somewhere in the middle. Not on the top, but not on the bottom either. At your own risk. There are no guarantees. And more than that, not all execs are pro readers.
I had decided to try one exec, because the person wanted scripts with diversity. I decided the first ten pages only. My choice. The person lectured me for two pages (I kid you not) that all montages have to be written in the past tense. Okay....I'd rather get a harsh rejection, and I can get that for free.
Anyway, I'm not putting down any script coverage website. If it works for you, then great. I just don't see it as mandatory for career building. A choice, nothing more.
Hi Lily,
That was his feedback. That you used past tense. Okay, we now have an indicator of that person's skill level.
There is an Irish saying "never take a journey with a fool. You can always find one when you get there". Lily, looks like you have arrived.
Craig, I say this with heavy sarcasm and the driest Canadian humour. Lucky me.
Pages