January 12
7 comments
January 12
7 comments
Session expired
Please log in again. The login page will open in a new tab. After logging in you can close it and return to this page.
Please confirm you want to block this member.
You will no longer be able to:
Please note: This action will also remove this member from your connections and send a report to the site admin. Please allow a few minutes for this process to complete.
What’s Working: Highlight specific strengths (e.g., “The opening scene hooks the audience immediately with its suspenseful setup.”).
What Could Be Stronger: Identify areas for improvement (e.g., “The antagonist’s motivations feel underdeveloped; could you clarify their backstory?”).
Why It Matters: Explain the impact (e.g., “A clearer antagonist will raise the stakes and make the protagonist’s journey more compelling.”).
Encouragement: End on a positive, forward-looking note (e.g., “You’ve got a strong foundation here—keep pushing and refining, and soon you’ll be on the level of past productions for the studio you’re submitting to or the last few winners of the contest you’re entering.”). THIS IS GOLD
I have read numerous articles on this site BUT this rates in the top three. For me, teaching younger children helped me immensely over the years to be objective about feedback. It’s something I work towards getting better with each day, each month and each year. But I focus on the story they want to tell and how we can make it better. I am not perfect but I strive for it. Also, I think working at a screenwriting coverage service of any sort gives you a super perspective — Los Angeles, New York or other places.
This says it all — The screenwriter is asking you to help them tell their story better. Feedback should serve the script’s goals, not your personal preferences.
Agree. I took the S32 screenwriter notes course, which helped me give more constructive notes. We’re here to empower each other’s stories. Onward and upward.
FYI Roadmap’s Pro-Reader Class starts Feb 2nd
FYI Roadmap’s Pro-Reader Class
Completely agree, especially with “taste-based” coverage. “Taste-based” coverage can quickly turn into rewriting someone else’s story, which is not what we’re here for as it ruins someone’s structure/vision and makes their story less unique to them. Sure, the person critiquing will be pleased with the applied changes, but the actual writer will not be pleased by the end of it.
When the question of “why should readers care about this character?” comes up, we should approach this with an open mind for all people and all experiences. We should also be critiquing the overall development of the character in their interactions– making sure they stay true to the writer’s intent. A character experiencing a less traumatic event and/or wanting a more attainable goal (ex: The protagonist having a goal to win Prom Queen as opposed to another protagonist wanting to find a kidnapped child) does not automatically make them less important or less interesting– it just means that the reader prefers action-thriller movies over high school comedies. Those things should not be considered when critiquing structure.
Unfortunately, giving helpful, constructive feedback is not intuitive. I highly recommend people consider taking Roadmap’s pro-script reader class. Sandra Campbell and I took the class in 2023, and it really opened my eyes to how to give feedback without crushing people’s scripts. Even people who’ve been giving feedback for years could benefit from this class. They have the class twice a year. Sometimes they give free spots to Black writers because they want more diverse readers to give feedback on scripts. I highly recommend!