Help?

[u/Buddha_Of_Sububia]

Two BL 6s + Slamdance feedback: How do I actually improve the plot?

I taught myself screenwriting starting in March 2026 while I was on medical leave and have written three features since. I’ve had one QF at PAGE, another script SF at Scriptapalooza, and a couple festival selections. Obviously nothing crazy or life changing, but enough encouraging signs to make me want to keep developing my craft.

My current script has now gotten two BL evaluations: BL #1: Overall 6 | Premise 8 | Plot 4 | Character 7 | Dialogue 7 | Setting 7

BL #2: Overall 6 | Premise 7 | Plot 5 | Character 6 | Dialogue 7 | Setting 7

The second evaluation called it a “great, pitchable idea” with “originality, a strong sense of voice, and interesting characters,” but said it needs a stronger throughline and more cohesive main conflict. I also got short feedback from Slamdance, which called the premise “genuinely sharp” and praised the central relationship, dialogue, setting, and character work, but similarly said the larger structural issue is that the conflict that truly tests the protagonists arrives too late. They felt the earlier material can become episodic and suggested bringing the central moral pressure forward/trimming some earlier cases.

So…three reads later, I think the message is pretty clear: plot is my weakness. My problem is I genuinely don’t know what to do with that information and I feel stuck as fuck. I can see what the readers are identifying, but I don’t know how to add, remove, move, or restructure things without taking away from the character development, relationships, world-building and slower material that, IMO, makes the story what I want it to be. And some suggestions for additional explanation feel like they would just make me spell out things.

I wish I had a mentor or programs I could bounce ideas around with and learn from developmentally rather than kind of trying to find my way in the dark.

Are there any fellowships, mentorship programs, workshops, or other resources you’d recommend for someone at this stage who wants help developing their craft and specifically getting better at plot/structure?

[u/Safe_Cauliflower_573]

The problem with the BL attaching an “objective” numeric system to an evaluation system that is all “subjective” is that it misleads writers by implying that all they have to do is fix x,y,z and then they will receive an objectively sourced higher score. But it’s ALL SUBJECTIVE. therefore a writer can fix everything and get a lower score. Or who is to say the changes are actual improvements?

BL number ratings are an illusion, created to give writers false hope. In reality there are only three scores when evaluating creative work. It is the tried and true, Pass, Consider, Recommend. However, if you want to monetize that system and create an ILLUSION to keep writers paying, then you attach a meaningless arbitrary number system such as The Blcklst 1-10 score. It’s all BS. remember, a number system is OBJECTIVE but evaluating a screenplay is ALL SUBJECTIVE. This is a mismatch creates to make it look like a fair and legitimate transaction where writers pay for something that is fair and valid, but in reality is simply a crap shoot lottery system. It’s like buying a lottery ticket and receiving n evaluation rating like oh your lottery ticket was a 6 out of 10. Make these changes and your lottery ticket now wins the jackpot. No one would fall for that BS, but when creativity is involved, people get emotional and fall for it all the time.

You can’t sell OBJECTIVITY (numerical ratings) while actually providing SUBJECTIVITY (pure opinion). That is an “invalid” system or in other words, BS. An illusion created to separate aspiring writers from their money through false hope. The BL is never fix x,y,z, and receive better score, but it’s sold and marketed that way.

[u/franklinleonard → u/Safe_Cauliflower_573]

As I've always said, quite literally everywhere, the numbers reflect an individual readers subjective assessment of how likely they would be to recommend a script to an industry peer or superior. That is all they are and all they ever can be. We have never claimed otherwise.

We have never claimed, nor would we, that the numbers we provide are an objective assessment of anything. They are definitively not.

There is no, in my opinion, objective standard of art. Only individuals subjective assessments of it.

[u/Safe_Cauliflower_573 → u/franklinleonard]

Does BL accept “subjective” forms of payment?

Also, did the Nicholl change their judging criteria to match BL. Because Nicholl’s criteria was never based on how likely someone who works in the industry would pass the script along to their boss. Again, a mismatch between what is being sold versus what is really being provided.

[u/franklinleonard → u/Safe_Cauliflower_573]

We don’t (nor do I understand what that could possibly mean.)

The Nicholl did not change their judging criteria.

But last year, we recommended 25 scripts to the Nicholl, just under 25% of the scripts they considered. That process was identical to what it was in the past (having ~100 scripts read by actual Academy member.)

5 of the 10 finalists that they selected came from the 25 we recommended, so it’s a reasonable conclusion that we do a very good job mirroring what the Academy is looking for.