My Assessment Piece from the Screenplay Module

I now have my pre-liminary result (before external verification) and I must admit... I'm not that pleased.

Of course I'm happy with the outcome, but I'm just not pleased with my current ability. Ultimately it's swings and roundabouts - having read the feedback, I should be able to rectify the faults (but not for the screenplay module itself - SIGH). I guess I want to be better than I currently am, and am reminded of A-Level results day. One of the girls didn't just decry her results (I can't remember for which course) but she complained and tried to get them changed.

Yes, she was a very good student, and yes, she was one of those that worked hard... but, her complaints weren't just about what she thought she'd earned. She was upset that other "lesser" students had got better marks... something had to have been awry.

I'm interested in what the other students have got, but only to work out where I place. Sure I'd be upset if others got better results, but I'd be missing the point - I'm not that good and I need to open my eyes and review where I stand.

Of course, it would have been nice to get a better result... seeing as this will all end up in my portfolio at the end of the course, for review by publishers (SIGH). Anyhoo:

Pre-liminary Grade: 65%
(Middle ground between 2:1 and 1st boundaries. A slow push skyward, I was just hoping that this would have been an easy module to ace).

Production of a marketable working script
Dark Machine is an interesting TV pilot with a lot of potential. Richard took on board many comments by myself in response to various drafts as well as from the class as a whole when presenting this story on our Writer’s Room Day. He has a strong concept and premise and some good characters.

The problem is in meeting the demands of the TV format, which eats up plot at an alarming rate. His opening Teaser is excellent, he totally had me at the top of page 2, but then wandered aimlessly for ten pages only to present me with the same plot point again.

It wasn’t until page 31 that I felt things really started to happen with the revelation of Petersen’s secret weapon. This should have been the end of Act 1.

The main problem throughout the script is dialogue as exposition. Characters spend way too much time filling in backstory for the benefit of the audience. And when they’re not telling each other about backstory, he’s giving it to us in flashback. He’s much more effective when he delivers visually (the reveals of Claire’s OCD, for instance).

Instead of splitting the story over two episodes, he needs to radically cut this script down and tell the complete story.

This script tries to set up way too many characters and situations. Those backstories can be explored in other episodes.

Production of work that is laid out as appropriate to form and industry standards
It is well laid out and totally professional. There is a tendency to use too many parentheticals, though, which is a symptom of Richard’s desire to control every aspect of the script, including how each line is said.

Understanding of how work might be situated in relation to contemporary film-making or TV , and an awareness of how the work would need to be pitched for production
Richard knows instinctively the kind of show he is trying to create. The only thing that lets him down is sticking to scenes and characters that aren’t pulling their weight.

This could be improved if he sold more of the sizzle instead of the steak. Pitching is about conveying the emotion behind a story, not the logic.

Commentary shows an awareness of strengths and weaknesses of work, and its dramatic structure
The commentary reveals an heroic attempt to apply every one of the paradigms we went through in the class (and then some) to the script. This was way beyond the call of duty, but it’s interesting to see how the different ones have helped. I think overall it might have been a case of way too much left brain activity to the detriment of the story.

My response to the assessment
I hate that it's right! Erm, no... focus: This goes right back to my novel writing, in that I need to stop worrying about what I want the reader to know and give them story, story, story. I'm too busy getting stuck in back stories and not spending enough time in giving the characters things to deal with, problems to work at, situations to rail against.

Which means I'm primarily dealing with a problem of the narrative's structure. I need to focus my attention on fewer, more detailed, characters and develop less strands but through a greater pace.

... on the synopsis front... let's not go there for a bit.

My Portfolio from the Qualifying Module

Finally got back my graded work. I think it's pertinent now to have a look at what I'm doing well and not so well:

62% (which in Degree standard is just within the 2:1 boundary... I could have done a lot better by putting more effort into it - oh woe is my ego).

Achievement of Learning Outcomes/Criteria
The strongest piece here is 3,000 words, where it is clear Richard has used the Workshop process extremely well to critically evaluate and improve his writing. All of the work shows some flair, promise (at least I think it's promise) and aptitude, technically good all round. The Fanny and Alexander pieces are pheraps least developed. Richard engaged extremely well with the Workshop process and showed a very good critical awareness of aspects of writing.

How this work might be improved
Development of voice, pace, work on sentence rhythm and structure. Issues more of finish and further iterations of the work, rather than any larger issues.

Performance Report
Richard made an extremely positive contribution to discussions and activities over the course of the week and I was left with the impression that he knew a lot about writing and reading. He has also been a very active moodler since the end of the week.

Richard's work shows a good deal of promise, and he seems aware of what he wants to achieve and ways he might begin to get there. He was very knowledgeable about contemporary literature and I felt he was taking marketing into account when he worked with his ideas, which were also strong.

Richard had read other people's work very well indeed and gave excellent, insightful feedback. He was very open to suggestions about hiw own work too. A very promising candidate

Hand written Note
Writing good throughout - slightly clumsy in places on Fanny and Alexander piece.

Press release is excellent, though, as is the way student has used feedback to produce a much improved piece of prose.

My response to the assessment
Obviously, I'm dead chuffed with this. It's the best bit of feedback I've ever got from any course (erm... well, I did get very good feedback on my Counselling Skills course too). Clearly, I'm able to collect my thoughts based upon crits, and use the best and most workable ideas to improve my writing. I fell down on Fanny and Alexander simply because I didn't put as much effort into it, but shoving the ego aside, I did find it difficult to adapt someone else's story, and match the emotion - but then, no comment has been passed on any inability to hold a reader's emotion - I think I relied too much on adverbs and a few tells in that respect.

My development lies here: "voice, pace, work on sentence rhythm and structure." It is said that "Issues more of finish and further iterations of the work, rather than any larger issues", but at present that is little consolation. As Solvejg said the exact same thing the last time he critted my work, I find this my greatest obstacle.

But at least, let's hope, I'm steady on this one track and I'm not going to flounce off back into some other erroneous area. Next step, to look at Solvejg's full critique on The Library Book's first chapter.