Screenwriting

I've had five requests for various scripts since December and have not heard back from any of the execs despite this language appearing on the page after I submitted the scripts:

"The executive has your material - now we go to work. Our team will follow up with them regularly and reach out the moment we have an update. In the meantime, know that silence is normal and not a signal.

Reads typically take up to 3 months - executives fit script reads around active productions and full client rosters.

We or the executive will email you as soon as we have a status within 3 months or sooner. Please don't contact the executive directly.

Keep the momentum going - stay active in the Stage 32 community and keep creating."

So if there really isn't any follow through after a script has been submitted then that language really ought to be removed.

Hey Steven Hart good to hear about your experience. You pitched your script -> the exec requested to check out the script. That's a very positive signal that your pitch is working and you're communicating your idea clearly.

After that stage though, the ball is in the producer's court. Do they love the script? Is it worth investing their time and effort into providing feedback? Why or why not? Are the basic questions a Producer would process themselves.

This is not meant to discourage you, but to provide a realistic perspective on the matter. Why were you disappointed? Why did you feel you were owed more than a read?

If you feel like you still need feedback, there are dedicated channels to go to for feedback.

But when a producer/manager/any exec has your script after requesting to read it, the expectation/desire (from their perspective at that point) is to want to be wowed on the page. As an exec you want something that excites you and rallies you into action. There's not many execs in this town who looks at their slush pile and thinks "I bet those would all suck to read." In fact it's the opposite. They look at that pile and go "I hope this next one is a banger." Then if it's not - it's onto the next one in the pile.

I say all this to hopefully reframe your perspective on the matter. A request is great. Go get more requests. But fixating on one Producer not being wowed enough is a waste of your time. Keep grinding on the script to make it wow the next one. You already have the convincing pitch in hand. One pass is a data point. Letting a single pass stop you is the real failure.

Eric Christopherson our team follows up on average 5 times after a script request for every script. we do so with regularity and always follow through on every writer's behalf.

but what happens more often than not is that the scripts requested don't deliver on the page. is that Stage 32's failure? or is that the writer's failure?

i don't say that to play some blame game, but to express that pitching and writing are 2 different skillsets. not every writer does both excellently. for example, i write 10x better than i pitch. when i get requests, it's always a pleasant surprise to the execs that my scripts are so good and they want to talk further, if they liked my vibe.

some writers are great pitchers or nail a pitch on a day, but then don't back it up on the page or don't have a handle on the soft skills required - i.e. the communication portion after a script read. and they blow it.

but there's no shame in blowing it. i've blown it a lot myself in myriad ways. most writers have blown it numerous times across their careers. but it's all just a data point. for writers to take and get better.

the key is just not putting all the pressure in the world on yourself. and not putting all your eggs in one basket. but being flexible to make adjustments or do things differently if you try something and it fails. or even if you try something, and it succeeds at first, then fails - those are lessons to be had and there's wisdom to be taken.

the great thing about screenwriting is that across your career, you can just keep writing and give yourself a lot of swings at the plate. the worst writers i know write one script or a couple scripts, then they bet everything on those few ideas being everything. then they're not and they don't get past it. the best writers i know are much more fluid and keep stepping up to the plate with a better swing - having taken the lessons from their previous at bats and applied them to their new at bat. those writers are the ones who hit home runs and get RBIs - if you'll spare me a baseball metaphor.

and if you don't want to take it from me, take it from Curry Barker - the director of Obsession, which grossed $171M at the box office on a $750k budget:

"If you want to be a filmmaker, make films over and over and hone your craft and don't put too much pressure on one idea. Just make something you can make and make a bunch of them and don't worry too much about it being good or bad. Just keep making them."

Steven Hart Steven, unfortunately, I think many writers have had a similar experience.

A request is always encouraging because it means something in your pitch, logline, or concept was strong enough to generate interest. But a request isn't necessarily a promise of feedback. Industry professionals are often reading large volumes of material alongside their day-to-day responsibilities, and many projects simply never receive a response one way or the other.

That said, I completely understand the disappointment. As writers, we naturally hope that if someone takes the time to request a script, they'll at least share a few thoughts, even if it's a pass. Sometimes a few sentences of feedback can be incredibly valuable.

One thing I've been learning is that a request itself can still be a useful signal. It suggests the concept was compelling enough to get through the first gate. Even if that particular opportunity doesn't lead anywhere, it may indicate that the premise, genre, or pitch has strengths worth continuing to develop and present elsewhere.

I'm curious: have you continued submitting the screenplay elsewhere since then, or has it evolved through rewrites while you've been waiting?

"We or the executive will email you as soon as we have a status within 3 months or sooner. " -- That's in the language. Where are my emails, Pat? I'd sent an email to Stage32 18 days ago on this very topic. No response yet. Where is everybody? "but what happens more often than not is that the scripts requested don't deliver on the page. is that Stage 32's failure? or is that the writer's failure?" That's a little reductionist, I think, as there are other reasons besides a judgment on script quality for passing, right?

Ashley Renée Smith yeah unfortunately it just couldn't happen. I got invited, but had to work on Pure Vortex. It's true I did a conscious move towards more narrative work for two reasons. One because I feel a lot more joy doing narrative stuff and two because I feel like with commercial work sometimes not being there as much, narrative on the other hand always has space. Let's face it nobody writes a script for a commercial when they have time, but you do for a film.

Welcome back, Ashley! Cannes sounds like an incredible whirlwind. As an author who has spent over a decade since 2014 channeling a deep cinematic universe from my consciousness (now a completed 74k-word literary sci-fi novel 'WHY I LIVE'), your question resonates deeply.

My biggest goal shift this year was walking away from traditional, slow literary agencies that don't understand the scale of modern trans-media art. I had to scrap the old plan of waiting for gatekeepers and adapt by taking total sovereignty over my work.

In my novel, the protagonist Mstr. Richard operates in a world where humanity trades real life for a sterile, risk-free simulation, only to lose their souls. I realized that rigidly sticking to the 'old industry plan' is its own sterile simulation. Growth meant building my own digital empire right here, combining my biomechanical art, Liuksemburgo meno premija 2024 recognition, and this script franchise for the big screen. My ultimate goal now? Securing a visionary partner for a major feature film so I can finally go touch the eternal ice of Antarctica and see how our Earth truly formed. The plan evolved from waiting to conquering.

Thank you, Ashley. I think that’s exactly what surprised me most. The project ended up revealing questions I didn’t know I was interested in exploring. Sometimes the story knows where it’s going before the writer does.

My goal this year was to finish projects.

Instead, I ended up chasing a new one.

I wrote a sci-fi series called Burn-In. What was supposed to be a fun concept became something much more personal: a story about grief, memory and the people we refuse to let go of.

I don’t know where it will lead.

But for the first time in a long time, I decided to stop waiting for permission and just create.

Ashley Renée Smith Welcome back, Leonardo, and I hope you're feeling better.

One goal I had at the beginning of the year was to focus almost exclusively on writing. I thought the path forward was simply finishing scripts and improving as a storyteller. While that's still a major priority, I've realized that writing alone isn't enough if the goal is eventually getting projects made.

Over the past few months, I've found myself spending more time learning about producing, financing, packaging, pitching, and the business side of filmmaking. That wasn't part of my original plan, but the more people I spoke with, the more I understood how interconnected the creative and business sides really are.

So I wouldn't say the goal was abandoned it evolved. The destination is still the same, but the route became much broader than I expected.

One thing I've learned is that sometimes progress isn't moving faster toward the original goal. Sometimes it's realizing you need skills you didn't know you needed when you first set the goal.

Great take, thanks for sharing.

Great post, thanks for sharing!

Congrats to all writers!!!

congratulations!

Hello Samantha,

I hope you're doing well.

I’m Kishan Vishvakarma, an independent writer and original IP creator from India.

I recently published the English edition of my novel/IP, THIRST BEYOND THE HOLLOW — a dark psychological horror story built around suspense, psychological dread, emotional conflict, and cinematic adaptation potential.

Having seen your work with writers and development projects through Stage 32, I wanted to ask whether you might be able to offer any guidance regarding the adaptation and positioning of original literary IPs.

As a brief introduction, I’d be happy to share complimentary access to the novel, along with my pitch materials, synopsis, and story bible.

If you feel this is something worth looking at, or if you believe there may be a suitable pathway or industry contact I should explore, I would genuinely appreciate your guidance.

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,

Kishan Vishvakarma

I'm super excited to be one of those lucky 96. My first Pitch too. Now the wait begins... will they or won't they like the script... :-) Congratulations to the others writers who also got their pitch selected for a read.

Thanks so much Erin Leigh!!

Congratulations to everyone who earned script requests and meeting requests these last two weeks! Way to GO!!

Congratulations to everyone

Hello Samantha,

I’m Kishan Vishvakarma, an independent writer and original IP creator from India.

I recently published the English edition of my novel/IP, THIRST BEYOND THE HOLLOW — a dark psychological horror story built around suspense, psychological dread, emotional conflict, and cinematic adaptation potential.

Having seen your work with writers and development projects through Stage 32, I wanted to ask whether you might be able to offer any guidance regarding the adaptation and positioning of original literary IPs.

As a brief introduction, I’d be happy to share complimentary access to the novel, along with my pitch materials, synopsis, and story bible.

If you feel this is something worth looking at, or if you believe there may be a suitable pathway or industry contact I should explore, I would genuinely appreciate your guidance.

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,

Kishan Vishvakarma

Spencer, thank you for sharing this. For many emerging writers, there’s often a lot of discussion about how to find representation, but much less conversation about understanding the business side once opportunities begin to arrive.

What stood out to me is the importance of knowing industry standards before entering any professional relationship. Building the right team seems just as important as building the right script. A great manager, agent, or attorney can help a writer navigate opportunities, but understanding the expectations and percentages upfront helps writers make informed decisions as their careers grow.

Appreciate you taking the time to break this down so clearly.

Spencer Robinson Thank you for sharing this. For emerging writers especially, understanding representation and industry-standard commissions is incredibly important because excitement about an opportunity can sometimes make people overlook the business side of their careers.

One thing that stood out to me is the reminder that building a career isn't just about finding representation it's about finding the right representation. A manager, agent, and attorney should be partners in your long-term success, not simply people collecting percentages.

I also appreciate the point about entertainment attorneys. Many newer writers focus entirely on managers and agents, but a strong attorney can be invaluable when contracts, options, shopping agreements, and negotiations start entering the picture.

For writers still searching for representation, posts like this are a great reminder to learn the business side of the industry as seriously as we learn the creative side.

Thanks for taking the time to break down the standards and help educate the community.

David Taylor [sigh]

Thank you for sharing this perspective, Spencer.

I've come to believe that building a creative career is not only about talent or opportunity, but also about alignment. The people who stand beside a writer whether managers, agents, or attorneys become part of the mechanism that helps transform ideas into reality.

Transparency in representation is important because trust is important. When expectations are clear and responsibilities are understood, creative energy can remain focused on what matters most: the work itself.

A strong team is not simply a business structure; it is a network of shared responsibility, where each person contributes to protecting both the creator and the creation.

Thank you for helping bring clarity to a subject that is often misunderstood.

- Seventy

This is the clearest, most protective breakdown of representation I’ve seen from a working manager. Genuinely useful. Genuinely rare.

It also describes a world with one prerequisite: getting someone to respond.

Not read. Respond.

Competition placements. Emmy-endorsed work. Sellable material by any reasonable standard. The team structure you’re describing makes complete sense to me. The percentages, the sequencing, all of it. What doesn’t have a map yet is the chapter before this one. How a credentialed, unrepresented writer actually gets into the room where percentages matter.

That chapter hasn’t been written. Or if it has, it’s not reaching the people who need it most.

Kenneth George Yeah, it’s definitely rooted in Mississippi, and the setting plays a big role in the series. Arcadia Hill follows a group of young adults navigating life in a city that feels familiar but slightly off, where everyday interactions are shaped by social dynamics, cultural expectations, and sometimes unspoken racial tension. Each character is dealing with their own sense of identity, purpose, and pressure, and the show moves through their perspectives as their lives start to overlap in unexpected ways.

I’m not approaching those themes in a heavy-handed way, though. It’s more about how they naturally show up. Like in conversations, relationships, and small moments. The tone blends grounded, real-life situations with a subtle, almost surreal feeling underneath it, so things don’t always feel completely normal even when nothing “big” is happening. At its core, it’s a character-driven series that focuses on how people exist in a shared space and slowly start to influence each other over time.

Hey Machorey!

A lot of writers have great premises. What gets my attention is when I can clearly see why the show can sustain multiple seasons. After the pilot, what's generating new conflict? What's keeping the characters evolving? Why does episode six feel just as compelling as episode one?

The other thing I look for is a unique point of view. It doesn't have to be a completely original idea, but it should feel like a story only this writer could tell. The market is crowded with familiar concepts, but a distinct voice is much harder to find.

And finally, character. If the audience wants to spend time with these people week after week, you're already ahead of most projects. Great series are often remembered less for their plots and more for the characters viewers become invested in.

Happy to chat more about the specifics of your project privately!

Hi Macorey,

Grounded yet surreal regional storytelling—especially set against the distinct cultural backdrop of Mississippi—has a massive competitive advantage in today's landscape. The challenge you are describing with Arcadia Hill isn't just about balancing tone; it’s about mastering tonal tethering.

As a script doctor and story architect, what makes me take a chance on a new series or writer isn't a flawless script; it’s a writer's ability to anchor structural volatility. In television development, shifting from "heartfelt" to "funny as hell" episode by episode is incredibly risky because buyers fear losing the show’s emotional gravity. The secret to making a multi-tone series stick is ensuring that both the comedy and the drama stem from the exact same thematic wound. The surrealism shouldn't be a random stylistic overlay; it must operate as the distorted psychological projection of the characters navigating their reality.

When you treat the ridiculous and the serious as two sides of the same coin, the unpredictable nature of life becomes a precise narrative engine. A professional showrunner or financier looks for that specific structural maturity on the page—knowing exactly when to tighten the tension and when to use humor as a pressure valve without shattering the universe's internal logic.

You’ve built a deeply authentic canvas here, Macorey. Protecting the unique DNA of that voice while packaging its structural layout into a high-conversion commercial asset is where the magic happens. I’d love to connect in the DMs, look at how you are balancing those tonal beats, and share a few architectural frameworks to help get Arcadia Hill the industry traction it deserves.

Best regards,

Volkan "Walkie" Durakçay

This is really insightful Sean Hussey, I appreciate you breaking it down like that.

The engine is something I’ve been thinking a lot about with Arcadia Hill. For me, it comes from the characters constantly trying to move forward—creatively, financially, emotionally—while the world around them never quite responds in a straightforward way. So even when things seem small on the surface, there’s always tension coming from that disconnect between what they’re chasing and what they’re actually experiencing.

A lot of the conflict regenerates through that—jobs, relationships, creative pursuits—all grounded, but with these subtle moments where reality feels slightly off, which keeps shifting how they interpret what’s happening to them.

And I definitely agree on character. That’s been the core for me—making sure each person feels like someone you’d want to sit with even when nothing “big” is happening.

I’d actually love to hear your thoughts on the engine specifically if you’re open to it—I can share a bit more with you about where I see the series going beyond the pilot.

Volkan Durakcay I really REALLY appreciate this—especially the way you framed tonal tethering. That’s something I’ve been trying to articulate with Arcadia Hill but didn’t quite have the language for yet.

The idea of both the humor and the surreal elements stemming from the same thematic wound is exactly what I’ve been aiming toward. For me, a lot of the surrealism comes from how the characters process confusion, lack of control, and that feeling of life not responding the way it’s “supposed” to. So even when things get funny or strange, it’s always tied back to something real they’re dealing with internally.

I also hear you on structural volatility. I don’t want the tone to feel like it’s shifting randomly—I want it to feel like it’s revealing different sides of the same reality.

I’d definitely love to connect

Hi Dayle,

This is an incredibly potent, high-stakes concept. The internal and external irony here is fantastic—a drug counselor trapped in a vacuum with the very client who stripped away his freedom. That is a magnificent narrative engine.

However, operating as a script doctor, your current layout is leaning more toward a mini-synopsis than a high-conversion industry logline. In television development, a logline must serve as a precision-engineered hook that states the Protagonist, Inciting Incident, Goal, and the Ultimate Conflict in a single, punchy breath. Right now, the core ironies (the inmate hierarchy, the recovery group, defending his life) are competing for oxygen on the page.

To maximize its commercial ROI and grab an executive's attention in under four seconds, you need to consolidate the syntax to elevate the central hook. Consider a structural framework like this:

"Wrongfully imprisoned alongside the former client who framed him, a recovering addict and drug counselor must navigate a brutal inmate hierarchy to run a prison recovery group—fighting to protect both his life and his hard-won sobriety."

Notice how this instantly establishes the immediate spatial restriction and balances the psychological internal conflict (sobriety) with the physical external threat (the inmates). It packages your deep thematic layers into an unignorable, clean package.

You have real skin in the game with this premise, Dayle. I’d love to connect in the DMs, look at the pilot’s structural layout, and share a few architectural beats to help ensure Arcadia Hill level depth is fully monetized on page one.

Best regards,

Volkan "Walkie" Durakçay

Hey Christopher Shawbell thanks for reaching out! We are launching our International Screenwriting Contest on June 15th! So keep an eye out - we'll be posting all over the site and you'll be able to read more about it in 10 days time!

Thank you, Pat. The blurb stated that there was an early bird entry. That's why I asked, because I could not find it. ~CS

Congratulations, Erin Dugard! Looking forward to your journey

Love this perspective. The absurdity contract you describe is exactly what separates bold storytelling from safe storytelling. As a writer I live in that space daily the best stories make audiences uncomfortable before they make them think.

Interesting framing, especially the idea of an “absurdity contract” between creator and audience.

What’s more consistent across eras is that absurdity has always worked when it’s clearly framed. Monty Python, Hunter S. Thompson, and similar examples didn’t rely on audiences automatically “getting it” they established a self-contained logic early enough that viewers understood the rules of the world they were entering.

The bigger shift now isn’t that audiences have become incapable of reading exaggeration, but that context is no longer stable once content leaves its original environment. Short-form circulation strips tone, setup, and intent, which can make even well-signaled satire look ambiguous out of context.

Your Lucy Fur concept actually sits in a strong place for today’s landscape because it’s inherently framed through a specific POV. That kind of explicit perspective helps audiences immediately lock into the intended absurdity without needing external explanation.

The real challenge for creators now is less about defending absurdity and more about designing work where the framing survives how people actually consume media today.

Jay A Swendris your idea is sharp and original, it perfectly revives absurdist humor for today’s audience. I can help make it polished, engaging, and impossible to misinterpret. Do you see it working best as a video, an audio track, or a multimedia feature? That will guide how I tailor it to grab attention and build trust with your audience.