So it’s that time of year again! I’ve been buried under LondonSWF Script Labs Submissions for the sixth year running … As we await the final results and selections with baited breath, here’s an overview of what I found lurking in the spec pile:
1)The Applications Themselves. Most writers had filled out the various sections well and had included everything stated in the submissions guidelines. I think this was the first year I didn’t have any major problems with this or screaming heeby-jeebies and SOS messages from writers in my inbox, so THANKS everyone! Perhaps the plethora of submissions advice online is helping to combat these questions and problems before they begin! Download your own submissions checklist, HERE.
2) Logline Issues. There were the usual problems with loglines, especially in terms of what I call ‘The 3 Cs – Clarity, Character & Conflict’. Here’s why:
- Lots described ‘around’ the story, so I didn’t really know what the story was; others hid the story behind woolly, cliched phrases like ‘learns how to move on’, which is a huge favourite amongst writers at the moment I’m finding … Just think about that, for a second: if your logline uses EXACTLY THE SAME PHRASE as a bunch of other people, how with producers,agents, etc know what YOUR story is?
- Secondly, some loglines asked questions. As any longterm LSFer knows,I despise questions in loglines, usually ‘cos 9/10 the answer is ‘YES/NO – Otherwise there is no story’!! Think very carefully before you include a question, folks. If it can be answered the above way, then CUT IT.
- Perhaps most shockingly, I found quite a few taglines! They disappeared for a while, but now seem to be back with a vengeance. Don’t know what taglines are/ how they differ to loglines? Find out, HERE.
3) One Page Pitches/Synopses. Despite the logline issues, I was heartened to find most of the one pagers were pretty good. Most writers opted for a ‘blow by blow’ account of the plot, rather than a more ‘salesy’ document. This wasn’t a problem for those writers who had a strong concept and good plotting technique, but was for those writers who were a little more woolly on these two things.
4) Concepts Vs. Craft. The best applications had an obvious, coherent and clear concept (regardless of genre, tone, style, etc). Whilst others had excellent craft – scene description, character role function, structure etc – but were a little muddy on concept at grass roots level, or had a concept I had seen MANY times before. Very few had BOTH … So when it came down to it, great concepts had to trump great craft. Why? ‘Cos craft can be TAUGHT, but great concepts are NOT ten a penny in any spec pile. True story!
5) Recurring Themes/Stories. I write about what I call ‘Zeitgeist Stories’, those recurring elements by different, unconnected writers that seem to come in every script pile. The Script Labs 2016 was no exception. In this one I discovered:
- Feminist themes/icons. For the second year in a row I saw many stories dedicated to feminist icons such as suffragettes, movie stars and charity workers, both real and fictional.
- Rock stars and musicians. Of scripts and stories with male leads, many were rock stars or musicians who had screwed up the relationships in their lives, most often with their families.
- Multiple war stories. WW2 and WW1 settings were probably the most popular, though intriguingly with nearly ALL female protagonists, especially Land Girls and female spies (probably because of the first point on this list). There were some male war stories, though interestingly they were all set in the American Civil War.
- Africa featured heavily in the submissions.This is perhaps not surprising considering we have a large contingent of South African writers attending LondonSWF this year. Of all African stories, slavery was the most picked theme.
- Drama’s The Deal?I was surprised to find a shortage of genre in this script call, beyond the Dan Mazer comedy lab (Script Angel Hayley McKenzie did her own selections for her Crime/Thriller lab). Perhaps writers are getting sick of high concept produced stuff, not only in movies but TV as well? Time will tell if audiences do too (though I’m unconvinced).
Overall
Competition was EXTREMELY high for the script labs this year – all got the customary 2 reads, with one needing 3!! There was the usual agonising, so everyone can be assured their application/s were taken VERY seriously.
So, if you were one of the lucky few to get through this year, CONGRATULATIONS!
But you know the drill – if you didn’t get a place *this* year ,you didn’t fail, you just DID NOT ADVANCE. And there’s always next time.
ONWARDS!
Lucy V (aka @Bang2write)
Lucy V. Hay is a script editor, author and blogger who helps writers. She’s been the script editor and advisor on numerous UK features and shorts & has also been a script reader for 20 years, providing coverage for indie prodcos, investors, screen agencies, producers, directors and individual writers. Lucy is also an author, publishing as both LV Hay and Lizzie Fry.
