Comments posted here are the opinion and responsibility of the author, and not MovieBytes. MovieBytes reserves the right to remove postings from invalid email addresses, or no-longer-valid email addresses.
(Displaying records 1801 thru 1875 of 1875 records)
Results Page:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
For a first year event, and one which focuses on promoting and encouraging women writers and filmmakers I think the festival was great!
Contest:
This was the first contest I had entered and I had lots of questions. Anytime I emailed any of the several questions I had, I received a prompt,professional and courteous response. I think this group is great! They are truly interested in the writer. Their critique was incredibly insightful and helpful. They told me things it would have taken me years to figure out on my own, even with the courses I've been taking. Their notes have made me optimistic about my ability and I'm eager to rewrite my script. Thank you, TFI. Keep up the great work!
-Sheila Rinear
Contest:
I had resovled to enter, and decided to drop of my script in person at the address given: Suite 387, 99 Park Ave, New York City.
There is no Suite 387 at 99 Park Ave. Square Magazine is not listed in the building directory. Building security suggested I check at the Mailboxes Etc. next door, perhaps the "Suite" was a box at that location.
Call me easily spooked, but the fact that this address wasn't attached to a real office of any kind made me uncomfortable enough to decide to spend my $50 elsewhere.
Contest:
I was leery of the contest when it only asked for the first 30 pages of the script. The comments from the reader were way off the mark because they had not read the entire script which has a non-traditional time line. The contest unfortunately seems to perpetuate the traditionalist mind set of the 3-act structure.
Contest:
I cannot really answer the last question. This was my first script submission. The critiques from the other contests to whcih I submitted my script were disappointing. But TFI's critique was extremely valuable and professional. I felt that the person writing the critique had a vested interest in my success. Although there were aspects of my script that were not professional, (which were noted in the critique), the critique treated me as if I were a professional and inspired me to be more careful with my next script. The content of the critique helped me imensely in rewiritng my second script. I feel as if I have found a parnter, not an adversary. Thank you very much, TFI. ROBERT VALVERDE, REDEEMING RACHEL
Contest:
This contest was a joke. My script, "Life's Back Pocket" won the Nicholl Fellowships in Screenwriting a couple of years ago, and since then a very well known actor has attached his named to the project. I find it silly that the pompous judges, who probably couldn't write a letter let alone a screenplay try and come across as helpful, when all you can read from their comments is that they're disgruntled wannabe screenwriters. The Judges comments weren't helpful in the least, they were laughable. The contest itself was terribly disappointing. It was poorly run, the website stinks, all it seems like they want to do is sell tickets to this silly Screenwriting camp of theirs. Camps are for kids. Who wants to hear some hack blow hot air about his trials and tribulations in the entertainment field. Not me.
Contest:
It's very easy to detract a contest if you didn't place highly in it. I placed only fourth and my personal experience was that the NCWA team got me an agent, gave my script a reading at a film festival, introduced me and my script to countless executives and industry pros and became very much like acting managers. To this day, two years later they are still in touch and just as supportive. I've been a finalist and semi-finalist in several other contests and none of them gave me any where near this much care and attention. Despite their scheduling problems last year, all you need is a damn good script and they will find it, turn your life around and become good friends. If you have a damn good script you'll do it and yourself a lot of good by submitting to New Century.
Contest:
A useful contest to enter for the feedback alone.
Deadline to hear back was by 1/31/00 and no notification received until third week in February 2000
Contest:
Entered in 98 and never heard from them again... have no idea who won what. Very disappointing, boorish even?
Contest:
Deadlines missed and excuse after excuse. No respect for the writer.
Contest:
They kept pushing the announement deadlines and never respoded to e-mail queries concerning the delays. I discovered through MovieBytes, not Empire, that I was a semi-finalist in April. The contest announced winners in AUGUST!
Contest:
The evaluation of the first 30 pages of my screenplay was excellent: very constructive, fair, specific, and focused. What was great - the notes reflected a true understanding of my intention with the script. Co-Director Rick Reichman and his staff have been highly professional. The competition values the art of screenwriting and encourages the writer to perfect the screenplay.
Contest:
I just got the evaluation of my script and I am very impressed. They give critique in 7 specific areas for a total of 100 points (Structure, Characterization, Dialogue -- 20 points each. Writing Skill & Clarity, Story Idea/Concept, Opening, Format & Manuscript Presentation -- 10 points each). Even though the comments were based on the first 30 pages and the synopsis, they were quite detailed and helpful. Definitely worth it. Since I am a finalist, my experiences have not come to an end, but so far I give it an A+.
Question #5 in this report card is a bit imprecise, as some contests, such as Austin, offer script feedback as an extra option only. In this case, the feedback I received for an additional $80 was outstanding. I may be entering the same script again, after a thorough rewrite based on those comments and others.
I received the critique offer from Austin after the script deadline, and was surprised that it was necessary to send the script to them again. I suppose the critique option was an afterthought and thus the process was not efficiently organized. Sending the script twice should not be necessary.
In general, however, that's a minor quibble. I believe this is a good contest, and hope to attend the conference if ever I place.
Contest:
They extended the deadline after I had already rushed my submission. Apparently, this has been common the past two years. Second, letters were supposed to go out on January 15. It's been over a month and counting....Hey wrong contest. Whoops
My script was in the top 10%, and I learned that because Greg Beal had been kind enough to hand write it at the bottom of the standard letter. Very nice of him. Those few words have made a lot of difference in my life.
A friend was one of the 5 winners this year and his writing career is being transformed because of it. So this is an important event, perhaps the most important.
I was a semi-finalist and really enjoyed the festival. Had the opportunity to meet and listen to some big names, like Shane Black, James Brooks, Callie Khouri, Robert Altman, Nick Kazan and Buck Henry. There were a few sessions organized for us finalists. My overall experience with the whole experience was very positive. The only suggestion I have to the organizers is to add some kind of feedback or at least a meeting with the judges (something promissed but not delivered). My rating : A
Contest:
I've enter both the screenwriting contest and the teleplay contest for Square, and in both instances, I've been very happy with the process. Sometimes you don't know what you're getting with these contests, but Square apparently seems to be one of the legit ones.
Contest:
This contest, unlike most, tells entrants exactly what it's looking for. It doesn't provide feedback, nor do most contests, but it also doesn't promise feedback then fail. Their website makes it very clear what type of material is most likely to appeal, and it's a healthy and welcome departure.
Contest:
You won't go wrong with this inside approach to getting your script(s) read. Peter Scott was very attentive and professional and focused on every detail of the process. I feel that if I hadn't even been a finalist, I would have come away from the experience with a good critique and a fresh perspective. I highly recommend giving American Accolades a shot.
Contest:
I attended the festival. The workshops. films, and other activities that provided networking were excellent.
Contest:
Very straightforward contest with definite industry introduction possibilities.
Contest:
This is the first contest to require on-line submissions, with which writers are going to have to get comfortable. I found them to be accessible, unlike many contests. A first-rate contest.
I won the contest, so of course my experience was wonderful, but I entered three screenplays and received some hard-hitting criticisms along with the occasional high praise. This is what we need -- honest critiques.
I entered two screenplays in 1999 and, while I was not a winner, I received valuable feedback by calling the coverage phone number provided. To me, that conversation was more beneficial than a written critique. I actually spoke to the director of the contest and he had personally read one of my screenplays, the better one of the two. He had some very constructive criticism, I think he really nailed both the positives and negatives of the work, and was very encouraging. I must've asked him 15 questions, and since few people have read my work, that Q&A session was extremely helpful. He even gave me some career advice. The cost is a little more than some other contests, although I did miss the less expensive early deadlines, but on the whole it was worth it.
I entered two screenplays in the 1999 contest. One placed second, one did not make the semifinals (I believe 44 screenplays were semifinalists out of about 400 entries). I received a scorecard for each screenplay and, while not overly detailed, they did provide excellent baromoters of what worked and what didn't for the readers of each screenplay. Was it dialogue? Structure? Character development? Description? Each category was given a 1-10 numerical rating and it was easy to see where additional work was needed. But by far the greatest value of this contest, so far, is I now have an advocate in Hollywood who is circulating my screenplay and talking with producers and agents for me. Eric Edson, the director of the Symposium, has been in touch with me on numerous occasions, via telephone and e-mail. Since I live in Salt Lake City and have a limited budget (I'm a journalist supporting a family of four, say no more), this has been a tremendous help for me. I can concentrate on writing new material while Eric does my leg work. I am confident my relationship with him and Hollywood Symposium will continue beyond the contest year as my career progresses. The continued contact has been an inspiration as well. I've completed three more screenplays since entering Hollywood Symposium. Also, Eric put together an extensive critique of all the screenplays, as a whole, outlining areas where many of them were lacking. It was thorough, hands-on advice I could really put to use. I highly recommend this contest!
Contest:
Few contests bother to provide feedback. TFI's notes showed their desire to educate as well as grade. Comments were both general and specific - generally in terms of the way main characters should develop during the script, and then specifically how OUR main character failed (or succeeded) in doing so. I was able to return to the notes and each time glean something new to take back to the next re-write.
I look forward to more from TFI, and I hope their success and publicity raises the level of feedback from other contests.
Contest:
Kudos and Lager all around.
Contest:
This contest examines the first 30 pages of each entry along with a synopsis. They provide excellent feedback, consisting of short analytic statements and rankings in the areas of structure, characterization, dialogue, writing skill & clarity, Story Idea/Concept, Opening, and Format/MS Presentation. In addition, the MS is returned wih the reader's marginal notations. In all, this was the most detailed and helpful reading that I've received.
Contest:
I was a semifinalist in last year's TFI competiton. I found their critque to be thoughtful, insightful and helpful in the revision process. Being a semifinalist did not help in advancing my career. This may, however, have more to do with the fact that my work was a spec script written for television rather than it being a reflection of TFI's efforts.
Contest:
Information about the process was prompt and complete. The notes were absolutely fantastic. The staff has been in touch with me since with encouragement and inquiries about the script I submitted, which was a semi-finalist and an honorable mention. At every step of the way, we knew who had advanced, what the names of the scripts were, etc. I have been in touch with one of the other semi-finalists since. This was by far the best of my rather limited experience with screenwriting contests.
Contest:
No information was offered to entrants ever on where they placed or even who were the winners, despite several requests.
I keep hearing a lot of backlash from other writers re: Sundance - especially that you need to have attachments just to receive official entry. I'm from Ohio and I didn't have any attachments or connections when I entered their '99 competition. Today I have an agent, a manager (L.A.), and have received two options on my scripts. I like to think Sundance acted as a spring board to where I am right now.
Contest:
I never entered this contest - and yet I received an e-mail from them saying that I would be notified re: their script competition results. (The only other person I can think of who would have entered the script is my agent - and I know for a fact that he didn't.) Intriguing, yes?
Contest:
I entered this contest expecting to receive useful feedback and was very disappointed. My feedback consisted of one meaningless 33-word, run-on sentence labeled "comments," and a few check boxes that rated script categories as excellent, good, fair or poor. While the ratings weren't bad, this type of feedback is non-specific and therefore, not helpful.
I'm rather certain the reader lacks experience with scriptwriting and professional reading and most probably didn't read more than a few pages of the script. First, he/she got the genre wrong. Second, his/her "premise" (where the reader provides a logline of the script) was weak, non-specific, inaccurate and derived from the first few pages of the script.
This contest could take a lesson from the Wisconsin Screenwriters Forum, which does a remarkably GREAT job when providing feedback.
Thanks to this useful service, I've noticed that I'm not alone with regard to the Screenwriting in the Sun contest. Thank you MovieBytes.
Contest:
Critiques seem to be modeled after John Truby's 22-Steps.
Contest:
The biggest problem NCW had in 1999 was in not making its deadline. Originally, winners were to supposed to be announced in April but in reality didn't get announced until January 2000.
Contest:
After my script won, I was referred to American International Management, Inc. as a rep for it. Earl is great! He wrote a slambang pitch letter, oversees submissions, answers e-mail immediately, and seems to stand ready at all times to offer guidance. The script is currently being read by 12 producers and I have great hopes for it. My experience couldn't have been more positive. Earl's the best and his American International Management, Inc. is a management company I recommend without hesitation. Thank you, Earl.
Contest:
Initially, I was very impressed with the contest. I was personnally called and informed that I was a winner and would receive the prize money and my script would be taken to Cannes(I was informed that I had won 3rd place and $250 over the phone). I received a letter later that week stating that I had won 2nd place and $500. I received calls stating they were running late and I would receive the prize money shortly. It is now January and I haven't received the money nor the indepth critique that was part of the contest.
I would have rated the contest much higher initially because Mr. Collins was so professional over the phone and in letters. KSN moved during the year from Gowen Studios to CNN and this may have had something to do with it. It is unfortunate, because I think this company had the potential to be a mover. They certainly had the location and Mr. Collins seemed really professional. My scripts have gone on to place in several other contests, but, nonetheless this experience was disappointing.
Contest:
Now that this contest offers feedback, the entry fee can be justified, but don't otherwise think anything will come by way of exposure. I did my homework and only one of all past finalists was even listed as having gotten agent representation through the WGA so obviously the so-called industry exposure is very limited. Where contests like scriptapaloozaTV openly advertise the industry insiders participating in their contest, Unique TV pulls some privacy agreement and couldn't even tell me where my scripts or info went. I found them evasive, giving WRONG answers to very basic industry-related inquiries/questions and awfully quick to offer a refund over any viable answers. Even their website looks amateur and has little or no info about the "producers" who supposedly run the contest. I wouldn't waste your time with this, other than in getting a paid reading with comments. As someone currently working in TV and about to be staffed on a show, I can tell you that these folks gave me answers that don't gel with what I know first hand about how this industry works. The fact they are based out of a P.O. Box nowhere near Los Angeles and won't release info on where your scripts are supposedly sent leads me to believe they have little or no real valuable connections in TV.
It was my first contest. I learned a great deal getting my script ready for entry.
Contest:
I watched one of the reads and the script was terrible! They writer didn't know how to write a sentence of dialogue without six cuss words. I submitted two scripts, one that got me an entertainment attorney, and another that got a good read from a "A" list director at Universal who wants to read all my subsequent work. The director even said it is rare that they find someone with such writing talent. I'm not saying this to brag, but the drama garage passed on this script, too. They seem to go ahead with their friends scripts, and no one elses, no matter how good yours is. I won't be wasting my time with them any more. I'm too busy with an optioned script of mine.
P.S. If you want to email me, just know I only check this email address about once a month.
If you make semi-finalist or finalist, attend! You'll be treated like a king or queen, meet tremendous industry folks in a relaxed setting and generally have a great time at the film festival. Plus, it's co-sponsored by Macallen scotch, so there's lots of free hootch. : )
Contest:
Totally unprofessional the way they continued to move notification deadlines back SEVERAL times. I believe they were more than six months behind schedule in their judging.
Dave Thome runs a great organization (WSF), and I've entered the contest several times (also been a judge on off years). Two great things: the feedback from readers for all submissions, and if you're a finalist your logline is submitted to actual producers and agents. I made several contacts through winning this contest.
The best competition out there. Every year I am sooo impressed by Greg Beal and the professionalism he and his people show. I enter every year and, though I only made semif-finals for the first time last year, I will continue to submit as long as I'm eligible.
Contest:
I appreciate the way they kept everyone apprised of their individual status as well as that of the contest in general.
Great status feedback and adequate, albeit sketchy, script coverage.
My script received Honorable Mention. I inquired about this and was assured that this actually meant something. I have no way of proving that they didn't just pass out hundreds of "Honorable Mention" awards, but I think they were straightforward and reasonable about this.
I think it has been helpful to mention this Honorable Mention in queries. In general, I think people tend to take more seriously awards presented to writers by writers' organizations. I know I do. In many contests (and, sadly, in many production companies and agencies), the judgment seems to be made by shallow marketoons who may not recognize or understand the depth of a story.
I ended up being disqualified last year, as I foolishly left my name on my script (too many late nights, I suppose). Nevertheless, I feel the two critiques I received were excellent, and more than compensated for the time and expense of entering.
Contest:
Please see my comments on the Maui contest.
Contest:
I entered this contest a couple of years ago, and was eventually informed that my script was a "quarter finalist." My persistent follow-up queries finally revealed that every entrant -- or nearly every entrant -- was told the same thing.
This is a pet peeve of mine, as I believe competent writers don't need coddling and aren't looking to be coddled. I ran a critique service for six years, and came away from that experience with an unshakable belief that the best thing you can do for a writer is to present, tactfully, the truth about their writing (as you see it).
Attempts to provide false encouragement are understandable to some degree, but the sure sign of an amateur. It quickly blows the credibility of the contest. I wonder how seriously anyone takes the Maui contest now.
In defense of Maui, I must say that the contest I entered was overseen by Peter Scott, who is no longer involved with Maui. He now runs something called (appropriately enough) American Accolades. I have twice requested that he take me off the Accolades mailing list -- to no avail. Perhaps this is the contest to enter if you're looking for easy praise and false awards.
Contest:
The readers were clearly unprofessional and I could tell, as did others, that the reader who graded my script had not actually read it, or if they did, they only read every tenth word on every other page. Reader also couldn't perform simple math or have any concept of geography or story arc.
Contest:
Mr. Robert Cope runs a first class competition, and genuinely cares about what he's doing for writers.
Not far-sighted enough to choose my scripts as winners makes them subject to just picking straws until one shows up longest, or shortest.
Contest:
They had a special mention portion on their website, which I thought was great. I think they did a good job.
I felt it was a totally professional contest and run as well as you could expect.
Contest:
I'm afraid we hit some snags. At first I rated this contest as being well worked, but the person running it took on agenting duties that weren't really granted in the contract that was signed. However, I believe we have worked through all of that (although I have withdrawn my 1st place win) and I think in the future there should be no problems.
If you'd like to contact me about this, please do so and I'd be happy to relate my experiences.
s jak
Outside of the notification period being far later than stated in their documentation, the review of my (losing) entry was helpful.
Nicholl is the premier competition, IMHO. very prof run, courteous, nice letters etc. made either the quarters or the semi finals last year nad this year (i cant remember which is which, in Nicholl the order of categories
is different than most contests. whatever the second stage of qualifying is, when you are like in the top couple hundred. i did not get any buzz off of this, but when i tell producers the script made it this far, they are usually int. in reading it.
Contest:
I liked the Big Australian because it seemed extremely legitimate: Allan Hawley Jacobs would reply personally to my email inquiries. They gave me a type of report card when I became a quarter-finalist. It made me very aware of both my strengths and weaknesses in the script, and focussed me a lot more on how it read rather than how I hoped it read. He also emailed Screenwriting tips later which were also helpful.
Contest:
Chesterfield, also well known, takes two scripts at a time, a good deal. you can also enter after you have produced credits, which i do, so will probably enter this oen until i have a significan deal someday, we can hope. No feedback, made semi finals twice, a little slow in responding, courteous letter, sometimes people are impressed that i made semi finals, sometimes not
Contest:
entered small script set in teh desert to this vegas based contest on fluke -- deadline met my date of just finishing. never heard anything back from them. enquired or saw postings, i forget which.
Austin is one of the recognized contests. made semi finals for second year, but again didn't have cash to spring for discounted attendance, special seminars for semi finalists. this year they were very slow about notifying me; the one comment is i had entered several scripts and the one that has placed high in other contests didn't here. they seem to ahve slightly different criteria than other contests. more perhaps story oriented than subject or style.
Contest:
entered with a script set in arizona just for the heck of it. No feedback at all, and very few entries; have no idea waht they were looking for or what their criteria was.
Contest:
Since it's only based on a few pages of a script (I think it was 10 or 15), I think it is more of an encouragemnet than anything else if you're selected as a finalist. But there's nothin' wrong with that!
Contest:
They seem like their really trying to distinguish themselves in the contest arena and in the industry. They give great feedback and encouragement. They also post entrants comments on their website.
It is a professional, well-run organization.
They let you call for feedback on your script after the contest is finished. I did and they were very professional and courteous.
It's THE CONTEST. With over 4 thousand entries a year, if you get in, that's significant. They only pick ~250 quarter finalists. They'll send you a new entry every year.
Contest:
I believe it is a well-run and prestigious contest. My inquiries were always quickly answered. The finalists scripts are read by known producers, agents, etc and I was a top finalist, but didn't win. As far as I know the list of finalists were only notified by mail (a very nice letter), but not posted anywhere else, which was a little disappointing, but otherwise I feel good about the experience and glad I entered.
Very accessible and supportive to writers. None of the usual pretension and snooty attitudes. Very encouraging.
Contest:
I entered and won in the contest's second year and was offered free lodgings fo the week of the festival in Telluride CO, which was certainly nice. Got to meed lots of independent filmakers, but the festival doesn't quite yet know what to do with screenwriters - but my winning landed me an agent!
My script made the "second reading" and thus, was invited to the festival and given access to a couple of the seminars especially for those who made "second reading".
I'm going to have to be from Missouri on the matter of all contests. Even those that are verifiably legitimate, really, is there any efficacy to a strong finish or is it all wishful thinking that agents & prodcos. come running to your door.
ASA impressed me as total legit. and, in general, a sincere, quality organization. So I re-entered it this year. I can't say that about the others I tested last year.
Please check out the other comments by entrants, attendees & participants at Moondance Film Festival & competition, by going to http://moondancefilmfestival.com
& clicking on the UPDATES link!
(Displaying records 1801 thru 1875 of 1875 records)
Results Page:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
Author: DonnaMarie Vaughan
