Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors Reviews

4.6 Rating 712 Reviews
93 %
of reviewers recommend Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors
4.6
Based on 712 reviews
Shipping & Delivery
On-time Delivery
Greater than 94%
Customer Service
Communication Channels
Email
Queries Resolved In
Over A Week
Customer Service
4 out of 5
Read Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors Reviews

About Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors:

Industrial Scripts Reviews

Founded in early 2010 by a Warner Bros and Paramount script consultant, Industrial Scripts® is now one of the world’s leading screenplay and story analysis companies, backed by major entertainment companies and with over 1,500 verified client reviews.

Our script consultants have significant industry credentials, writing script coverage for companies and studios including Paramount Pictures, Warner Bros., Universal and many more. Working with screenwriters, authors and filmmakers of all levels and from myriad locations, we also deliver intensive training both online and offline.

Visit our site here >> https://industrialscripts.com/

Visit Website

Email:

https://industrialscripts.freshdesk.com

Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors 5 star review on 18th March 2024
Linda
Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors 5 star review on 11th December 2019
David Worth
Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors 5 star review on 11th December 2019
David Worth
Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors 5 star review on 24th January 2019
Gordon
Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors 5 star review on 27th December 2018
John
Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors 5 star review on 3rd March 2018
Alexander
Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors 5 star review on 10th August 2017
Steve
4
Anonymous
Anonymous  // 01/01/2019
My report arrived on-time. I received 7 pages, as opposed to 4, which excited me and i am grateful, and although the review had some nice points and supported arguments, i felt that it drifted into the realm of how the reader would write it, and the story the scenes they would put in, which can be great and food for thought but i did feel that it was detrimental to what the aim was, i.e. to review the script. Please don't get me wrong the writer knows their craft, but it felt that a few points were a bit generic screenwriting points, i.e. more backstory and building the environment of scene. if relevant fine, but it doesn't always enhance the story your telling (i.e. we don't know walter white isn't just a science teacher, but one of the best scientists who helped establish a million dollar company in the 1st episode, but it doesn't take away from the set up of a teacher cooking meth to pay his bills) Also i felt, that considering the tag line i had sent in, the one i received with the report, didn't actually sum up the piece, and if it did, did so in a somewhat amateur / childish way. I am glad i paid for the review, i don't feel cheated in that way but do feel that some of the focus was misdirected. I feel the review was a mixture of both. 3 STARS - You disagreed with much of the analysis but it left food for thought. 4 STARS - Strong analysis in most areas, let down by one or two weak notes. as i in my eyes was a 3 out of 5 job, but i agree more with the statement for 4 stars
Helpful Report
Posted 7 years ago
The course leader gave some useful information.
Helpful Report
Posted 7 years ago
if you're bent on knocking a person's work down, stick to the 2-3-page report he paid for. Who wants to endure an additional 3-pages of kicking
Helpful Report
Posted 8 years ago
Although I appreciate the advice given and agree with some of the criticism, I do feel that many of the points made were very conventional, treating the thriller genre as formulaic and reductive. I also recognise that perhaps this is the industry we are pitching to, but I would have liked a more open-minded approach to the analysis.
Helpful Report
Posted 8 years ago
Industrial scripts have a very user unfriendly IT system so submitting a script for feedback took ages. After completing all stages of the process, I then waited the three weeks for my feed back. When I heard nothing, I had great difficulty getting in contact anyone - there are no phone numbers, and users are given the clear impression that everyone is far too busy to be in contact. I finally found an info email address, after which I got a prompt reply which asked to submit the final part of the process again, even though i did this first time around. I did this and then the process finally started to work. My script was responded to within the agreed time limit, and the quality of the feedback was simply excellent. The reviewer did a great job of focussing in on the scripts' s strengths and weaknesses, and fired me up to do another draft. Really grateful for the feedback, but equally frustrated by the submission process
Helpful Report
Posted 8 years ago
I thought she/he made some very good points, especially regarding clarifying the main goals with both the protagonist and antagonist as these develop through the story. The earlier drafts were a bit dialogue-heavy and I think in my haste to correct this some of Henri's goal definition got lost eg there was a line in the first act which I removed in consultation with the director 'as soon as I inherit my shares there will be big changes at Kingdom'. So her points are fair and fairly easy to work up. I also agree that his psychologkcal conflict can be explored more, especially in relation to the'vision'. I will certainly do this. The ghost originally talked and we thought it was all a bit scooby-do so we lost the dialogue here but she's given me some good ideas to show Henri's madness more. Where I take slight issue with the report is in her summation that the plot's too descriptive. She makes the point on several occasions that its visual and the pace is fast and supported by punchy action sequences and some witty dialogue so to summarise that there is too much expo is many of the relationships seems contradictory. I do agree that the corruption plot development can be shown more and maybe told less but apart from that, most of the relationships are developed through action. On the corruption development, expo can be useful sometimes to move things along with brevity and I didnt want to get caught up in all the detail of how money passes through accounts electronically. The secret account is basically a mcguffin so I want to paint the picture with very broad brushstrokes. Thereis a place for exposition if it can be relayed in the context of action and so I do not feel this is as much of a problwm as she makes out. However, if I'm showing him as more active then we can overcome a lot of this anyway. The script was originally based on hamlet and i'm glad this wasn't picked up on in the report as I've been moving it away from that. But it does help explain why Henri is perhaps al ittle passive in the 2nd act. Blame it on the Hamlet overhang! I also inderstand her point about the WAG stereotypes. This is difficult to overcome without a lot of subversion as you have to deal with audience expectations to a degree, especially in satire. However, I am going to make Gabrielle a bit more switched on amd elsewhere do the opposite and make Wagdom even more OTT. She misreads the Henri/Jessica arc, its not about materialism. Essentially, what draws thwm to gether is that they have their own private world they create together as evidenced by their opening exchange which prorects them from 'planet football' and the public glare. This is then torn apart by Henri's feelings of madness and isolation and the fact he no longer feels he can trust anyone. To get back together both of them need to come to terms with the world they inhabit. Henri does this by challenging Lord and saving the club. She does it by giving up the band. Of this isn't coming across well enough though I will do more work to clarify. The car he gives up is symbolic of the glitzy life he is prepared to give up for her at the end. Finally, I have to say I don'tagree with her summation of the ending.Henri does save the club at some cost to himself. He saves it because it doesn't go bust and survives the scandal and can now renew itself (symbolised by George) rather than be obliterated in the fall out. Also, there is essential expo in the resolurion scene because that is the purpose of a resolution scene, to tie up thw loose ends. Therefore the radio dialogue is useful because it quickly outlines some of what has happened in the intervening period. All in though, some very useful points and I've got a lot of ideas springing from the report to help me build on what's there.
Helpful Report
Posted 9 years ago
I received feedback from Industrial Scripts three weeks ago. On the plus side, it was evident that the reader had read the whole script which is at least something. Also, I received 8 pages of notes as opposed to 4. On the negative side, the review felt more like someone's opinion than true feedback and the reader steered me toward copying something that had been done before which felt wrong. I will use one or two comments, but for the hefty price tag, I must admit that I have received better (free!) notes from fellow writers so I would not recommend the service (or perhaps the reader?).
Helpful Report
Posted 9 years ago
Many recommended changes to the script were listed but none of which were expanded on, which renders the suggestions useless to the client. It would be extremely useful if at least a couple of the ideas provided were explained or expanded on.
Helpful Report
Posted 10 years ago
Industrial Scripts - Screenplay Editors is rated 4.6 based on 712 reviews