What's your feeling on contests and coverage?

My limited experience is that it's hit or miss. I've entered two so far. Finished top 20 percent in the Austin festival (for what that's worth), but the feedback from 2 different readers at Austin was pretty helpful. Entered BlueCat and while I didn't get anywhere, I thought there feedback was pretty good. Only pure coverage I got was Script Reader Pro and my experience was ok. The reader (who I didn't pick) liked the script but 80% of his feedback was simply paragraphs regurgitating what he read. Not a lot of useful feedback. 

Hi Debra, welcome "back into the ring".  Sorry about losing your Mom. At least, for her last four years, she had a loving daughter to care for her.  I once worked as an aide at a nursing home.  There were many sad abandoned souls in our care and far too many for us to spend any appreciable time with them.  However,  the facility, owned by an order of nuns, was considered well run.  

I'm new to writing screenplays, so I have no track record.  Prior to joining Script Revolution, I sent an overly ambitious screenplay to a script consultant.  She helped me enormously as I had fallen into all the errors an amateur routinely makes.  With her patience and gentle guidance I reworked the plot, cut out superfluous characters and polished draft after draft.  It cost me, yes. But she helped me out of the mire of my own writing.  I was so pleased to have a finished script I entered it in 10 contests.  By nature I'm an optimist, which is why I've been playing the lottery for decades.  [tonight's Mega Millions jackpot is a crazy $930 million.] In my mind the odds aren't much different between winning the lottery or getting  a film made.  So, I shall resolutely carry on betting on both.  Kind regards, Elizabeth Blandford

I've entered a handful with a previous script and didn't get anywhere and that's fair enough, I don't expect that script to win anything, but I never get the feeling that anything really happens for the winners, so what's the ponit? A laurel? I don't hear much about along the lines of, here's a film we made using the screenplay of the winner of this competition. And that's if the competition offers some sort of solid route to production. I just feel the odds are not in your favour anyway, and I don't feel confident that competitions will improve those odds, especially with the cost. I've decided to direct any spare funds I have to getting the odd script feedback from a known reader with good recommendations and no tight deadline. I was just checking some competitions out this evening on FilmFreeway and I couldn't find anything that really fitted, plus it's about £40 for some entries, so I thought, I might as well just sign up here. So I did :)

I like contests mainly because I enjoy competition. But I haven't personally benefited from any as far as I can say for sure. My best finishes have been in the semi-finals of some lesser known competitions (one already defunct) and I've only ever advertised in my queries one script that finished in the top 6% of the Nicholl. Maybe that got me a few reads. Agents and managers who've submitted to interviews I've read online say that they can be swayed to give a script a try if it did well in a competition they respect. But the contests take so long to happen. You enter the early bird to save money and six or eight months later you get a result! Lately, I've been spending my money on options that happen faster. For example, I recently paid a particular development exec listed on the Stage32 website to write coverage for one of my scripts, my first TV pilot, and he got back to me in less than a week with the feedback, asked if I'd like him to send the coverage to his boss, I said sure, and now his boss has the script and bible on his desk.

I just got sent the laurel certificate for the Best Script for "An Incident In A Small Town", which is something, but I don't know if it will lead anywhere.

Congrats Pete.  Keep us informed so we may all learn.  Let's hope it's the 1st of many.  good job!

I just thought I'd let everyone know. I read profiles this morning for managers based in LA. Some, but not all, some actually encouraged emerging screenwriters to include in the submission any contest/competition wins. As a conversation starter to show your script is readable. No profile stated which contest/competition, but it did say win only, as in first place. I don't take this to mean that going bankrupt by entering all and any contest/competition is some kind of guarantee. I just found it interesting.

On a side note, I've yet to see/hear anything that says feedback (coverage) contests lead to anything concrete. Personally, I disregard contests for feedback only. Instead, I ask my writer friends. Networking, it does help.

Lily, what are "feedback (coverage) contests?" 

Eric, a lot of contests call themselves feedback festivals. Feedback and coverage, as terms, are often used interchangeably, plus definitions are constantly changing. So I included both.

A question:  I recently got coverage from WeScreenplay, and for the most part it was well-written with some useful angles for me to consider.  However, after reading through it a couple times, for the life of me I couldn't find a single word that suggested they ever read the third act.  The last thing they specifically mention happens right before the third act begins.  

Has anyone ever gotten that feeling from that outfit or any other professional coverage?  

WeScreenplay is uneven like most such services. The best notes I ever received were from there and some of the worst too. Plus they appear to be easy graders based on my experience and on the Reddit site for screenwriters where there is talk about script coverage. But I do think it a little egregious that the third act was ignored. You might email their admin to ask whether this is acceptable to them.

Well, I could be full of shit too. Just wondering if others ever felt this way. They weren't such easy graders either! Like I said, they gave me some actionable advice, and for $69 (with three days turnaround!)I got my money's worth I suppose. 

It's a long long time since I paid for any kind of feedback and that was Black List evaluations. I think feedback can often be so brief that it can feel like the reader skimmed or skipped areas. I know Red Ampersand take this kind of thing seriously and want their customers to feel motivated so would probably welcome you reaching out rather than feeling let down.

I've got the same opinion as CJ. I've been entering literary, comic book, and scriptwriting festivals for over a decade and the subjectivity is palpable. I've gotten 5/5 for dialogue before and then been told my story did great only to discover myself overthrown by people with lower scores somehow. Question mark? 

The other thing to remember is some of these selection committees do have socio-political mandates as well. Whether it be inclusion or diversity. Just make sure you are taking that extra time to make sure you're not entering the wrong pool.  

Had a chance to attend a seminar with the Lit Agent who rep 'ed Jack Kirby (want to say Paul Levin?) once and he gave an even more dismal spin on this topic. So I love the optimism this forum provides : ) 

I have spent thousands over the years on coverage and contests, only to see the results come in from every angle. It's discouraging and I'll likely stay away from them from here on out. My last work was panned by a so called horror producer over at Stage 32 who called the story cruel, brutal, and evil and basically tore it to shreds. One month later, a producer found it here on Script Revolution, got an option, and will begin filming in May. Go figure. BlueCat was no better. Three different reads, three different results...from "breakout story, very professional" to "lacking in compassion, needs work". CJ is right. Stick to your voice. If you've spent many years honing your craft and you know how it stacks up against produced and unproduced work, then stay the course. I read a lot of the scripts here on the site and produced works as well. There is quite a difference and it's clear as to who has really put in the work and effort. Practice! Write! Read!

Cruel, brutal, and evil?  I'm sold!

When I first started out (some writers weren't even born), I bought script notes. It was worthless. Just as most screenwriting peer review sites are. The all around problem is, just because a person can read a screenplay, doesn't mean they can understand it. Finer written screenplays are actually harder to understand because there isn't as much exposition, which means a reader has to interpret what each scene means. Most people can't. If they could, their own scripts would be better. The problem with 99% of wanna be screenwriters is, they don't get past the "show don't tell" stage.

An example: I wrote a screenplay where a woman hears voices of her victims. Are the voices real or not? There were 5 reviews, and all pointed out they loved the voices. Two thought they were real, two didn't, one wasn't sure. All were absolute it wasn't answered in the script. Where it gets funny for me is, ALL 5 mentioned the worthless scenes throughout that did and meant nothing. They all used the same scene as an example. That scene answered the voice being real question. It wasn't said in some awful line of dialogue. It was shown through her actions. These same people, if they saw the scene on film should understand it immediately. 

With both contests and coverage, you're flipping a coin on whether the person reading your script enjoys your genre, your characters. I had someone call one of my characters racist because they assumed the young black child going to the YMCA likes basketball. If your characters aren't PC or Woke that'll be points against you in some readers minds. Trust me, they'll have no problems telling you either. Of course the contest or coverage your paying for will include this worthless nonsense. 

You can spend a ton of money on contests and get nothing. I've read writers bios whose script have placed in a few contests for years. But, they still have never had a script produced. 

Spending money on contests and coverage is worthless. You're better off studying and learning the craft on your own. Figuring out your strengths and weaknesses and fixing them till you write a great competent screenplay. If you can't do it on your own. Find someone online or in your area whose interested in the same thing, and work off each other.

Just remember,  no matter how good your script is, when some Producer and Director get a hold of it, you won't recognize it. 

There are some valid points there, and some I would call into question.  

The troubles you will encounter with peer review are real, yet these are the same troubles you will encounter with a) producers and b) audiences.  Producers tend to not be dummies and may even appreciate your loftier aspirations, but they will have audiences and profit in mind.  And even when your film is acted, shot, edited, and scored beautifully, you may find it dumped out on the market, fighting for critics top ten lists, and generally being forgotten.  I just read a AV Club review of The Burnt Orange Heresy that wrote about how it was too smart and subtle for the Academy.  Yep, probably so!  And it grossed $144,000 in the United States, with Donald Sutherland, Mick Jagger, and Elizabeth Debicki in the cast.  A complete failure in business terms, and it earned a measly 57 on Metacritic.  I now want to see it, and I may admire it intensely, and then it will likely fade into the ether.  

I try to think of that kind of context when I get coverage or trade reviews.  I don't regard anything I read as gospel, but I regard it as an honest reaction, usually.  With peer reviews, even moreso than coverage.  I've received much more thoughtful, insightful reviews on Talentville than I did from AFF or WeScreenplay, and I know they read the whole thing carefully and weren't rushed.  Some of the plain, objective errors in my AFF coverage of "Frustration" were ridiculous.  They claimed my protagonist killed both antagonists in the end, when one was shot by the police and the other got away. They said he beat his wife, and he only hit a surgical tray near her.  Yet, I gained some remarkable insights into how convoluted and nonsensical my plotting was, and now no one complains about the plot.  

I know at the end of the day my career won't really get anywhere until I meet that producer who connects to my vision.  Among my peer reviewers, even the positive reviewers, I can think of just one who REALLY got what I was going for.  She read my scripts and saw everything I intended them to be.  Talked about them the same way I thought about them.  Hell, I had to stop myself from falling in love with her, and perhaps vice versa.  People like that help me remember that my audience is out there.  There IS a producer out there who will react the same way.  If I can find them, then we'll make some bold, ambitious gems together.  Maybe her scripts will take off and she'll be that producer, who knows.  But I'd never have met her without peer review sites.

I put contest placements in context too.  I do reasonably well, but I don't win.  I doubt I ever will.  But most winners don't get made either!  Yet I've had conversations with folks who were impressed enough by my semifinalist and quarterfinalist placings to at least consider me to be competent and not insane for wanting to do this.  And that's not nothing!  In fact, I recently chatted with someone who initiated the conversation because they were impressed by how well I'd done, then they proceeded to inform me that the contest I'd done the best in was a worthless cash grab.  I thought, "Uh, sure, dude, but you just said you were talking to me because of those placements!"  At the end of the day, we were able to have a serious conversation about my script's potential.  And that's what I need, basically.  I need to do well enough that I can keep having conversations like that.  Eventually, karma and fate will do their work, but having that "I'm not crazy" card helps me play the game.

I spent many, many years using myself as my sole barometer, honing and honing without getting much outside feedback, and I can assure you it wasn't the best path.  Coverage and peer reviews are VERY fallible, but they helped me get outside of my head and look at my work from the outside.  I take what's useful, the stuff I agree with, I toss out the rest, but I almost never get nothing from them.  Even if it's a plain case of a dummy not getting anything, that tells me, "Gonna be some dummies out there that are going to look at it this way."  Just like most producers will reject it, and even with luck plenty of folks one day might buy a ticket for it, sit in a theater, walk out and say, "That was dumb, let's go get drunk!"  

I feel a lot of what you're saying, but "worthless" is just too absolute for me.  That's my two cents, of course, so take it for what it's worth.  But I know I'm better as an artist for it.  PS The director of "Sound of Metal" sounded off on the industry recently, and sounded much like you.  And his film is AMAZING.  So more power to you, brother, I pray your way brings you success too!

Just to kinda reiterate what I said in the linked thread mentioned early on; we really learn two important things as a result of feedback and that's not only what people think about our work but also how people giving feedback think in general.

The latter is just as important as the former and gives us critical context. The smartest writers are the ones who are analysing and appreciating both factors.

When I was getting feedback and entering competitions all those years ago I would live or die by it. I genuinely thought those doing judging were blessed with remarkable insight and a level of objectivity that meant nothing was personal. I now know how ridiculous that is but you only gain that insight by seeing the industry for what it really is. These days, there are sales agents and producers I wouldn't care for the opinion of because I know their fears and biases.

In a way, the real win you get from competitions and the real lesson you learn from feedback is how utterly flawed most of it is. By understanding what these flaws are, you're empowered to move forward without waiting for permission, without changing to satisfy the trolls, and without ignoring genuinely useful feedback when it comes your way.

I have never entered a script competition for reason I believed they were floored. That was till I was approached and invited to be a competition reader/judge for Nashville screenwriters competition. Now, I can't speak for the others... But Nashville's vigorous appointment application and their scorecard system, together with their overall professionalism have changed my views.  

I hope they're paying your handsomely for your loyalty.

Hi CJ. No payment... They have a point structure per script you read. Points accrue to script services etc. Yeah, it sucks, But I'm doing it for exposure - add to my profile (C.V). I don't mind, They let you read/review at your own time/pace, and they are really such a nice bunch of people to work with! Their manager, Cat Stewart is a very pleasant person. 

CJ, interesting points about recognizing bias in reviewers, but that's a problem with so much random/anonymous feedback. It's such a crapshoot for contests offering coverage. I was shocked by how poor the coverage was for a well known contest, it wasn't even readable and full of typos. 

I just paid $12 to the Paris Film Festival for my screenplay "The Niece" to be read. The Niece has previously been a Finalist in another script competition, and it is set in Nice, France. Maybe it might have a chance, but there's no guarantee of that, but that is a reasonable price for a chance.

I'd never heard of the Paris Film Festival but $12 sounds so very reasonable comparatively. (This American is trying to talk his Japanese wife into retiring with him to the south of France one day. No luck yet. But then neither of us speaks the native language there.)

I recently bought coverage a pilot I'm working on from Script Reader Pro...the reader told me straight up that they liked my idea better as a feature, then spent about 7 pages telling me how to restructure it as a movie. I feel like I should've written in the notes beforehand, 'this is a pilot please and thank you'.

No disrespect to them, I just don't feel like I currently have the skill set to write a feature. The 'to be continued' aspect makes me feel less stifled. I'm a fairly low-culture sort of person which is why I dropped out of film school. Give me a trashy sitcom any day. 

If that reader spent more than about a paragraph on their own idea of making it into a feature, that's obnoxious IMO.

Lucy, I'd ask for a refund. 7 pages? Sheesh. I'm not against giving people ideas for how to rework their concept, but that shouldn't be all one has to say about it, or even the focus. "Consider turning this into a film!" is enough, or maybe a few quick bullet points on how one could do that, but then get back to dealing with the script on its own terms. Especially when you are suggesting changing something so fundamental. If it's a TV pilot, then come up with suggestions to make it a better TV pilot. I mean, if it takes 7 pages to explain how to make it into a feature film, that signifies how much of a departure it must be. And surely it would take fewer pages to suggest tweaks to improve it as a TV pilot. 
 

Worst they can do is say no!

I'm not a confrontational person so I would never complain. You're not allowed to send bibles/pitches etc so there's no proof that I actually put any thought or planning into it beyond the pilot (which I did) At least I got a decent logline out of it. Lol

EDIT: One positive thing I will say about it - because I prefer to stay positive and I've had time to think about it - The critique was very constructive, in the sense that they interacted with it in a meaningful way and offered approaches that showed they understood what I was going for. Sometimes a reader will critique something on a surface level but then sort of leave you in the lurch by not offering any helpful alternatives. So in that sense, it was a positive experience and I feel like I need to give them credit for that.  

With them, I would recommend choosing the two-week turnaround. My ideal wait time for coverage is 2-4 weeks. There's this weird option I think where you can pay more to get it in less time, which I guess makes sense if you're in a rush. I personally wouldn't want feedback from someone who only spent a few days on it. I find the longer the wait, the higher quality the feedback. It gives them time to reread it a few times so they don't miss anything important, which a few people on this thread I think mentioned as an issue. But that's just my experience.