An Inside Look: Judging Creative Screenwriting Magazine’s Competitions

Creative Screenwriting Magazine runs a range of screenwriting competitions for television pilots and feature length scripts throughout the year. Each one has a specifically-trained pool of readers to judge each category. This article breaks down the various components that are judged and some sample comments you can use to ensure your script is in its best possible shape.

Overall, we are looking for a high level of craftsmanship and professionalism on the page. There are other contests where it may be better to swing for the fences, but we are always mindful of the fact that Creative Screenwriting Magazine winners are going in front of agents, managers, and producers.

Universally, the readers are trained to focus on character above all else. That is the first thing that is scored, and several of the following scores are judged in the context of how they suit the characters.

We still want members of the reading team to bring their own insights and values into their scores so that different writers who submit to multiple competitions, have a better chance of eventually matching with a reader who fully appreciates their writing.

Getting Past Round 1

Here are some internal notes from readers during the first round of evaluations:

“The script was exceptionally well written with an intriguing premise, authentic dialogue, and complex characters. My initial reaction was that the characters would be unlikeable/unrelatable due to the fact that they were executioners, but I found it impressive how the writer managed to perfectly balance their flaws with redeemable qualities. With the writer excelling consistently among all categories, I feel this would make for an excellent, gripping movie that would have widespread appeal.

“Satirical in tone, this provides a fresh look within the horror genre while adeptly adding comedic elements to its plot.  The writer does well when incorporating comedy into the script where it never feels forced or shallow, and the structure is never sacrificed.  It would stand out in today’s market amongst others within the genre and has a clear demographic that it could be marketed towards.”

Those quotes are from top-performing scripts in the first round. Because the endorsement is so strong (and the score so high), the truth is that we don’t need much nuance in the internal note.

Conversely, here are some scripts that did not perform as well, but still advanced:

“Aside from the fact that the narrative descriptions contained a lot of prose, the script was well written and featured an action-packed storyline that felt original. This is a war story told from an unusual point of view, prompting me to recommend it. The main character made for a very strong female protagonist, and I could see her being an inspirational character. Adding to the appeal was that this was based on a real character’s true encounters and therefore would have mass appeal especially those that enjoy historical stories with complex character development.”

“The writer’s voice stands out almost immediately, and the reader is instantly put into the world of the story. The characters are distinct and feel full-bodied, and their relatability makes it easy for a potential reader to connect to the material.  This has great potential. However, the dialogue needs to have a consistent quality.”

What you’ll notice in this range is that there is usually a clear high or low element being described. There is something that is motivating the reader to push the script forward, an issue keeping it from being a front-runner, or both. This is the reality that screenwriters need to understand. At this level, you need to be very good at something, but you cannot be bad at anything.

On the other side, here are a couple of scripts that just barely missed advancing:

“There were a few issues with the narrative descriptions, for example the writer including dialogue, and overall, they were a bit overwritten. We also didn’t know a lot of personal information about the characters as the narrative focused predominantly on how they functioned at work. The draft stuck to advancing the plot instead of developing the characters. Other than that, I felt that the premise showed potential to make for a compelling story for the right audience.”

“The hook has familiar aspects while also creating intrigue with a fresh twist. There’s definite market potential for fans of the crime genre, and also for multiple potential seasons.  The writer’s voice is present, and the overall structure of the pilot is solid as well.  However, the pacing is too slow for the story being told. It ends up alienating the reader, making them lose interest.  There’s still a lot of potential for the material, but further development is needed before it can compete well.”

What you’ll notice here is that both readers mention the potential of their read. Our readers are very good at not giving up on a project. In truth, there are a lot of writers out there that get a lot of mileage on potential. Projects with bursts of great writing, strong underlying concepts, or some intangible charm can expect to regularly advance. To be told that your project has potential is also intoxicating for a developing writer. The truth is, unfortunately, that to be told that you have potential means that the current draft has limited it to unrealized potential.

Getting to The Final Round

Next, we have the scripts that advance to the final round.

“The suspense and unexpected, authentic outcome of the opening, followed by the excitement and camaraderie of the next scene, provided a solid hook. Some plotlines felt a bit too coincidental. However, just when it seemed the read had peaked early, the narrative was re-energized via the new training sessions. Coupled with the devastating ending, the narrative was thrilling throughout. The character relationships are very well developed and authentic, although there’s a missed opportunity to showcase key reactions to major decisions. The unfiltered and serious social issues the characters face made it more captivating. Overall, although a bit lengthy, the story is true to extraordinary life, and thoroughly engaging.”

“The writing style is incredibly visual and puts the reader into the time period and environment of the story easily. The protagonist stands out immediately, and her personality is compelling and vibrant. The written action does a great job at creating the world, and there’s a lot of potential conflict and complexity to the story. The pacing in the beginning is a bit slower, but by the second act it picks up effectively. Every supporting character has a role with purpose and stays realistic.  The introduction of a key antagonist in the third act adds a dimension to the conflict, and the pacing and structure of the pilot leaves the reader on a note that has them wanting more. This is a fresh perspective with a hook that is definitely marketable.”

Both of these projects moved to a shortlist and were reviewed by our judges. We would have been happy to have either of these projects win the entire competition. You can see that the readers are getting quite granular in their analyses. Some details have been edited out. We don’t expect a winning script to be perfect, but there is a distinction between a fixable issue with a part of the draft and a more serious flaw in the writing or the concept at hand.

Making The Shortlist

To provide one final wrinkle, here are scripts that were finalists but missed entry into the final shortlist:

“The writer’s voice is shown immediately through the character descriptions and the interactions between characters.  The writing is extremely visual and puts the reader into the story with ease. The draft introduces the lead instantly and makes sure to make him distinctive. The inciting incident occurs early and keeps the reader interested, and character dynamics make the reader want to know more.  There’s definitely market potential here. The tone and pacing of the narrative work well together, and the pilot sets up potential conflict with various characters realistically and with excitement. This draft has a lot of style and potential market value, but may not stand out amongst others like it that have come before enough to compete well at the current stage.”

“Generally funny, but occasionally overexplains jokes. Some of the humor is undoubtedly controversial. It is not necessarily disrespectful but will ruffle feathers. It also seems like some of the edgier takes will eventually be subverted or confronted in some way, but this does not happen in the pilot. This leaves the reader to choose whether or not to give it the benefit of the doubt to these characters. Otherwise, it’s well-structured. The relationship between the two protagonists is relatable despite the unusual circumstances and has the potential to work well as the emotional core of the series. One lingering concern is the fact that this is a pilot when it would be better suited to a feature.”

“Fairly dialogue-heavy, but some of it is very compelling. The subject matter relating to wealth disparities is timely, and the protagonist is immediately engaging. He’s both humble and larger than life, which is exactly what’s needed to effectively depict this historical figure. If their opponent had the same level of depth and characterization, perhaps in lieu of some of the longer, headier political-philosophical discourse, this could be a very strong script. As it is, though, it feels more like an intellectually engaging summary of a historical figure’s life than a totally cogent, emotionally impactful story.”

You can see several of the factors we’ve discussed at play here, though with a higher standard of application. Potential is more of a neutral concept, as it should be realized on the page at this point. These projects can grab a reader’s attention at some point, but the writing isn’t strong enough to sustain it. Having a distinct style is nice, but a reader needs to be able to engage with a project on multiple levels. Similarly, a comedy needs to be consistently funny, and a biopic needs to impress beyond the compelling subject.

To put it simply, at this stage, we expect a script to not just be good, but be uniquely exceptional at what it is specifically attempting to do.