Sun, 2025-May-04 11:08 (BST)
Check out the thread here on Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/comments/1kdziv8/first_blcklist_c...
I've screengrabbed it all before it gets deleted.
This has totally blown my mind. This is a service that's been running for how long? Thirteen years? How the hell does a reader as poor/lazy as this get through the selection process, and why has it taken a public Reddit post to highlight the issue?
Personally, I didn't think the review was good enough for AI - maybe it dumbed it down. That being said, I have seen several BL reviews that definitely appeared to be AI-generated.
Readers at BL get paid $60 per script.... This from Franklin:
https://blog.blcklst.com/on-pricing-at-the-black-list-website-part-2-92d...
Our readers will receive $60 for each evaluation with additional bonuses based on the quality and volume of their work. (Half hour evaluations will cost $70 each and readers will receive $45).
This means that a reader reading 20 feature scripts a week would make approximately $60K in a fifty-week work year.
This in my view is just on more part of the intellectual dishonesty in Franklin's ongoing diatribe about the BL. To make it seem that a BL reader job is a glorious $60K a year job and therefore..... What Reader would violate BL's standards to risk that HUGE payday.
It's BS. Most readers are part-time... they got real jobs and are picking up BL reads as a supplement... walking around money. So they are not risking $60K to cheat a review... They're risking $60 bucks.
And an arduous $60 bucks at that - to get to Franklin's $60K a year - you'd have to have an average read and write notes for 4 feature scripts within 8 hours each day - 5 days a week, 8 hours a day after day.... you know, sweatshop reading. What kind of quality review is that going to produce???
So yeah.... there is little financial incentive for Readers not to use AI ....make a their pocket money for awhile then eventually get caught and fired ... but why would they care.... they're basically losing 60 bucks.
The anonymous review industry is what is dying. If BL wants to survive they are going to have to start publishing the actual bios and names of their readers.
A.I. is more involved now in the screenwriting world than most realize (or want to admit). On the reading/evaluation-side, Austin was called out on this a few years ago. One of the scripts I submitted in '22 or '23 did seem A.I. suspicious to me (a glowing, positive review for a pilot that then didn't advance to the Second Round).
Now, while I'm currently skeptical of A.I.'s involvement in the development process, if I'm being totally honest: Can it be that worse than human readers? I'm sure we've all fallen victim to a terrible reader; it's almost a rite-of-passage. I've worked with or know of many readers, big and small, and far too many have been too young, inexperienced, or frankly, straight-up idiotic.
But, to charge money and rest of your laurels, these places need to do better. And that starts with us. Stop shelling out our money; get out of your echo-chamber; stop seeking confirmation bias; and probably most importantly: stop looking for overnight success.
(P.S.: I dumped the Black List long before A.I. became a thing, and I'm happy for it.)
"So yeah.... there is little financial incentive for Readers not to use AI ....make a their pocket money for awhile then eventually get caught and fired ... but why would they care.... they're basically losing 60 bucks.
The anonymous review industry is what is dying. If BL wants to survive they are going to have to start publishing the actual bios and names of their readers."
This is the crux of it for me. I almost admire how BL keeps everything secret. The readers, the people downloading, even the recent success stories thread on Reddit was just anonymous people talking about nameless projects. It causes people to fill that void with the best their imagination can come up with. In this case, however, it really shields a bad reader because they don't have to worry about their reputation in the slightest. Worse than that, since the entire team is anonymous, they don't have to worry about a bad apple spoiling the batch. There is no impetus to protect your image, other than to keep what sounds like a tough side-hustle going.
"Now, while I'm currently skeptical of A.I.'s involvement in the development process, if I'm being totally honest: Can it be that worse than human readers? I'm sure we've all fallen victim to a terrible reader; it's almost a rite-of-passage. I've worked with or know of many readers, big and small, and far too many have been too young, inexperienced, or frankly, straight-up idiotic."
As ever, the reason someone ever wants to be a reader needs to be brought into question. Good readers are incredible human beings who have a passion for curation. However, I've watched so many of the most arrogant pedants communities have to offer become readers in some form, and boy are they proud about that role too. Those people are there predominantly to slam scripts and instill dogma.
A.I. can certainly help streamline the process, especially when it comes to script categorisation and interrogation. It all comes down to alignment though and this is where people get readers wrong. Readers aren't their to filter good and bad. They are there to align scripts with their bosses tastes and needs. I know quite a few producers now and, I can tell you, if I was picking scripts for each of them to make, I would pass and recommend differently for each. This is the fundemental issue with curation and evaluations. It's also why most competition winner announcements fall mostly on deaf ears, because most producers simply think, "Well, what the hell do you know about what I want?".
"But, to charge money and rest of your laurels, these places need to do better. And that starts with us. Stop shelling out our money; get out of your echo-chamber; stop seeking confirmation bias; and probably most importantly: stop looking for overnight success."
Absolutely. It starts with communities knowing what they deserve and what works best. I've just made a comment on Reddit to this effect. It's easy to blame the platforms but, even if they are run with the best intentions, people will stil promote them as a shortcut.
Reading, evaluating, and writing notes that mean something?
> If BL wants to survive they are going to have to start publishing the actual bios and names of their readers.
I think readers tried this themselves.
This is when I usually tell my story about LinkedIn: Way back, maybe 10 years or maybe less, I did research on LinkedIn for "Blacklist reader" and came up with some interesting results. Individual reader profiles. About 35 of them.
The "worst" was a young woman who boasted about doing 3-5 evaluations per day, but I saw others in the 3ish per day range.
I thought, "how can this be?" Nobody then or now can read, evaluate and write any sort of comprehensive notes about my scripts - not that I'd ever then or since been on the BL.
I posted a summary of my disturbing findings on the Done Deal Pro writer's board. Word spread quickly, because within days the LinkedIn profiles were down or edited.
This is the thing I can't get my head around. If BL had launched this year, I could totally understand that they're going to have hiccups with readers, both in terms of who they employ and the policies they work under. I just would have thought, after all these years, there would be systems in place to protect both the organisation and readers themselves. Things like needing reputable references and systems to stop people from overworking themselves. I know it can't be stamped out entirely, but, wow, this is a premium-priced service.
Back when I had my worst Black List experience, which would also be over ten years ago now, I had two low-scoring and snidely toned evaluations come in at the same time, on Boxing Day (the day after Christmas Day in the UK). I remember thinking then, who the hell is churning out reviews during the holidays? When I complained, I was told it was two different reviewers, one of whom had given another script of mine a high score. I was always skeptical of that, not just because the tone of the reviews didn't match up, but because it would mean ANOTHER reader was working through Christmas.
TBF, it's a tough job, and one I wouldn't want to do. It must also be so tempting to just phone it all in and take the money. I mean, ChatGPT is right there and you can always redraft the original output to make it sound like you. That takes me off on a whole tangent though, because I do wonder if an anonymous reader is really always going to act in a script's and BL's best interest. I mean, being really cynical about it, isn't there going to be an overlap of competition there? Isn't it in a readers interest to give what they think's a good script a poor score, so less attention is on it, and then go direct to a producer and try to get an agent's cut for shopping it?
I don't know.
$130 to have an anonymous person give your script a number in the hope anonymous people download it. Madness.
Yet another post critical of the Black List was removed by r/screenwriting mods today on the basis it's "Lacking Research/Low Value/Low Effort/Subjective"
Link here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/comments/1kf75yj/im_amazed_at_how...
$130 to have an anonymous person give your script a number in the hope anonymous people download it. Madness.
That's the part that gets me the most . It makes me believe this:
Writers really don't give a crap about the review. They want the 8 --
BECAUSE ---
They mistakenly believe that the 8 = access to the industry, despite the fact that --.
THERE IS NO PROOF OF THIS. As is the case with the secrecy of the readers, the BL also employs secrecy in terms of its results.
The only success that is consistently published on reddit, videos, articles et al is the successes of scripts on the annual Blacklist which --
HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BL WEBSITE
That conflation with the Black List and the Annual Black List has been an issue since day one. Whether or not it's always been a deliberate ploy is debatable, as, in all fairness, what else were they going to call it? On the flip side, next to nothing has ever been done to make the separation clear, and it gets even more confusing when top BL scripts go on to be included in the annual list.
The magic 8 has always been a spark of genius. We all know that's what people want because it's the big validator, and the only realistic way that $130 minimum gamble becomes an investment. That's the difference between a pass and a recommendation.
Some pretty shocking stuff seems to be coming out. There's someone on Reddit claiming a writer spent $13K on reviews to boost their script up the list. Comment here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/comments/1kfeyuo/comment/mqqjj8u
Again, I only hold BL partially responsible for becoming the beast that it is. Communities, particularly r/screenwriting willingly fed it and encrouaged feeding it on a daily basis, all while brushing other platforms under the carpet.
Whenever it started, in my opinion it is purposeful and misleading conflation. If you go the Blacklist Paid Review site, right there on the banner page is:
The Annual List
Every December, we survey hundreds of Hollywood film industry executives about their favorite unproduced screenplays from that calendar year. The result - the annual Black List - is a showcase of the industry's most liked unproduced screenplays.
Since its inception in 2005, more than four hundred Black List scripts have been produced as movies, grossing more than $28B in worldwide box office. Films produced from scripts on the annual Black List have won four Best Picture Oscars (SPOTLIGHT, SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE, ARGO, THE KING'S SPEECH) and twelve Best Screenplay Oscars. A Harvard Business school study found that "Black-Listed scripts were twice as likely to be made into films...They also did better at theaters, with movies of the same budget generating 90% more revenue at the box office."
I think there is zero chance the average Joe doesn't conflate the list with the site
Again, I only hold BL partially responsible for becoming the beast that it is. Communities, particularly r/screenwriting willingly fed it and encrouaged feeding it on a daily basis, all while brushing other platforms under the carpet.
Absolutely! The reverence it is given in some places is mystifying to me.
> Absolutely! The reverence it is given in some places is mystifying to me.
I don't know about Reddit, but back in the initial days of the BL I was on Done Deal Pro every day. Very distracting and time mostly wasted never to be recovered.
However, when the occasional "actual real-live agent" or executive showed up on the boards, you could feel the surge in attention, as everybody did their best to become best buddies with the person who deigned to write a few words of interest in our predicament - trying to break in.
I remember an agent (remain nameless, but is still in the biz) showing up on DDPro and criticizing my approach to write nothing but "spec" scripts, and looking to sell them, as opposed to a spec or two before being agented and then going on to be royalty in the OWA field. He said "That's not how it works," about my endless spec-writing. I'm glad I didn't listen.
Anyway, since this is a BL thread, I'll get back to Franklin Leonard, whom everybody knew as an up-and-comer, showing up on DDPro to promote his upcoming website derived from his annual list. The topics had the forum administrators in a tizzy, with some of the threads going over 100 pages. Very exciting to have a "big shot" paying so much attention to us "wee writers". While no doubt Franklin expended an unbelievable amount of energy, it was pretty obvious that it was toward building recognition of his site, which it surely did once it got started.
There were a few hiccups. While I've never been even on the sign-up page - I've been able to avoid a lot of trouble, just as I've missed a lot of opportunities, by being dirt poor most of my life - I was a voracious reader of these epic topics. I recall a problem he had early on, when some writer complained that his scripts were showing up on the BL without his permission or knowledge. Whoops! Frankling quickly apologized and got them off the site; but we never learned how it happened.
However, this incident did give me the impression that this "Black List" was potentially just that: A list that execs and agents could go to see how others have graded our beloved spec scripts, and to endlessly pass along such information on other off-line lists. Well, now that doesn't seem fair to us, as we pitch our stuff around the biz, does it?!
Anyway, I've always like Franklin, but I've never thought much of this particular site - especially its dominance and even its name. Perhaps realizing its time is coming to an end, I see he's now expanding into "Nicholl Fellowship support". Ha. Smart cookie. Meanwhile, the name of his old annual list was fine, but I do find that his "inversion of that thing that happened in the 1950s" (ie. calling it the "Black List") wasn't appropriate to try to attract writers and artists, who were precisely the people to suffer so much under that "thing that happened in the 1950s" (and even, to a lesser regard, today, in terms of cancel culture, etc.).
Once he moved the BL the website/script evaluation side, I really wish he'd given it a different name, don't you? I know that "branding" is important, but there are analogous historical crises and crimes that come to mind that one wouldn't even jokingly hoist on the intended user community in such a way.
But, all water under the bridge now. I wish him well, and know that his customers must caveat emptor - if that's the right grammatical way to say it.
As I said, I like him, and it's always fine to see a member of a minority group do so well - and in this case it's been wit and timing, and hard work and maybe even some luck, as opposed to any sort of affirmative action. He did play a minor-minor-MINOR role in my development, actually, back in 2009 when he actually answered an email I sent to him when he was at NBC/Universal. All he did was respond that "this is a question your lawyer or agent needs to ask of us", which was true, but at least it helped me to focus my energies on a particular project, in a particular way, at that critical moment.
Under a year later, I started my writing stage that resulted in 50 features + 4 shorts in 8 years. I still haven't exploited them, ie. to get them on-screen. But even I can personally look back at those years and wonder how in the hell I managed to do it. Meanwhile, since 2018 I've tried to break into the producing side, to begin to accomplish said exploitation.
And by the way, don't any of you sweat your current accomplishments vs. my 50 scripts. One of the old sayings is that the average writer breaks in after 8-9. But we know that some have success with their first, and I guess it takes folks like me with 50 to bring up that average to what it is, that's all.
To each their own.
Great description of your journey. Steve. Enjoyed it.
It's Franklin's ongoing conflation that is the tipping point for me.
Here is a great example from as recent as April 2024:
https://designobserver.com/s11e2-how-franklin-leonard-is-using-the-black...
Franklin Leonard is invested in making the film industry the best version of itself. He is the founder and CEO of The Black List, a platform that nurtures emerging screenwriters and gives screenplays that aren’t attached to a big producer, actor or studio a chance to be produced. Since The Black List’s founding in 2005, 440 scripts from its annual survey have been produced as feature films, grossing $30 billion in box office worldwide. These films have earned 267 Academy Award nominations and 54 wins including four Best Pictures (Spotlight, Slumdog Millionaire, The King’s Speech, Argo). Prior to founding The Black List, Franklin worked in feature film development at Universal Pictures and the production companies of Will Smith and Leonardo DiCaprio. He is also a former Sundance Juror and a current member of The Academy.
Franklin offers no correction or edit of this entirely misleading linkage between the site and the annual list. Notice how clever the wording is.. There is no rational human being that wouldn't think that the Black List Site was what resulted in all those successes associated with the Black List Annual Survey.
So - I believe he is dishonest
"I don't know about Reddit, but back in the initial days of the BL I was on Done Deal Pro every day. Very distracting and time mostly wasted never to be recovered.
However, when the occasional "actual real-live agent" or executive showed up on the boards, you could feel the surge in attention, as everybody did their best to become best buddies with the person who deigned to write a few words of interest in our predicament - trying to break in.
I remember an agent (remain nameless, but is still in the biz) showing up on DDPro and criticizing my approach to write nothing but "spec" scripts, and looking to sell them, as opposed to a spec or two before being agented and then going on to be royalty in the OWA field. He said "That's not how it works," about my endless spec-writing. I'm glad I didn't listen."
Looks like we were both very active on DDP at the same time. I found the community to be pretty nasty at times and one of the best things I did was get away from its nonsense. The biggest issue is allowing people to post anonymously. While it means some people can speak very honestly about important topics, it also meant it was a haven for trolls. It was elitist too, and the competitions were all about filtering everyone into the tiers they advanced to. BL just brough it another tier that meant you were either an 8 rated writer or you weren't.
It is, of course, all nonsense. These people who desperately want curation and scoring just cannot handle the chaotic nature of subjectivity.
I'm seeing a lot of DDP in Reddit lately, and that creepiness you talk about too. Sadly, the industry is full of that. It's very easy to put on a tie, make some claims, and have people lick your boots. I've seen absolute basket cases get away with it.
"Once he moved the BL the website/script evaluation side, I really wish he'd given it a different name, don't you? I know that "branding" is important, but there are analogous historical crises and crimes that come to mind that one wouldn't even jokingly hoist on the intended user community in such a way."
Again, this is one of those usually completely inexcusable things that BL seems to be allowed to get away with. Sometimes, it's almost like someone came up with an idea that writers and Hollywood should hate at every level.
"As I said, I like him, and it's always fine to see a member of a minority group do so well - and in this case it's been wit and timing, and hard work and maybe even some luck, as opposed to any sort of affirmative action. He did play a minor-minor-MINOR role in my development, actually, back in 2009 when he actually answered an email I sent to him when he was at NBC/Universal. All he did was respond that "this is a question your lawyer or agent needs to ask of us", which was true, but at least it helped me to focus my energies on a particular project, in a particular way, at that critical moment."
I don't really know the man. I do know people who know him and, well, they describe him as a "wall street guy", which I don't think they see as too much as a compliment, but does remind us that other people have different priorities, mindsets, and operate within a different cultural world. As a van driver from Stoke-on-Trent, he may aswell be from Mars. He is tricky and slippery though. His online discourse has shown that over and over with his calculated ambiguity. I remember just how long it took on DDP for him to finally confirm that the BL platform didn't discern between reader downloads and industry downloads at the time. That seems like something that could have been cleared up from day one of questioning.
"One of the old sayings is that the average writer breaks in after 8-9. But we know that some have success with their first, and I guess it takes folks like me with 50 to bring up that average to what it is, that's all."
It's a meaningless stat. Write for yourself first.
"Franklin offers no correction or edit of this entirely misleading linkage between the site and the annual list. Notice how clever the wording is.. There is no rational human being that wouldn't think that the Black List Site was what resulted in all those successes associated with the Black List Annual Survey.
So - I believe he is dishonest"
I mean, there's all kinds of issues with that bio. One of the biggest criticisms of the Annual Black List is that the PR continually implies that the list is responsible for those films being produced. The reality is, I understand it, that many of the projects listed have been in some stage of production already: "Unproduced" just means unfinished.
FL did actually publicly call me a liar once. It was in a Reddit comment that he quickly edited. All I'd done was calculate some years wrong within a post about how you cannot rank the subjective. I always found that interesting.
I mean, there's all kinds of issues with that bio. One of the biggest criticisms of the Annual Black List is that the PR continually implies that the list is responsible for those films being produced. The reality is, I understand it, that many of the projects listed have been in some stage of production already: "Unproduced" just means unfinished.
Absolutely. The VAST majority of the scripts on all of the annual Blacklist lists were already somewhere along the production food chain. e.g., Agent/Manager/Producer and/or Studio already attached. The Kings Speech, Juno etc, etc would have all been made regardless of whether they were on that annual list. So lie number 1 = somehow that list generates = success in terms of production.
Lie # 2 is the consistent and ongoing conflation of the pay for play website with the annual list. Franklin of course denies this - but then why mention the effing annual list on the HOME PAGE of your pay for play site??????
Lie # 3 = these are the most liked unproduced scripts. They are not. They are merely the most marketed unproduced scripts.
"They are merely the most marketed unproduced scripts."
Yeah, I've always felt like it's basically a clique where projects get a lot of valuable PR attention before they are released. Obviously, a film that's been on the list is going to be considered worth checking out.
Let's also not forget:
Ex-member of staff at #1 when the site came out.
Weird stuff like "Untitled Lax Mandis Project" making the annual list.
Another suspicious case. https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/comments/1lof7pr/black_list_label...
The original post has been removed, but reading the comments, I kinda got the gist of it. Several people mentioning A.I. being used to read/evaluate submissions.
We've reached a seminal moment in technology and entertainment. The unions can fight A.I. all they want and producers can promise not use it all they want while screenwriters can swear they're not using it all they want, but it's here, probably has been for two to three years and ain't going anywhere anytime soon.
To bring some clarity, the writer submitted a script where a character has a stutter, and they spelled out the stutters in the dialogue. The script had been read and well received by others, with no issues mentioned. The BL review claimed the script was full of misspellings, which is odd, as the writer ran it through a spellcheck and only the stuttered parts came up as an issue. The obvious speculation is that the evaluation was written by AI, which would struggle to determine the difference between stuttering and typos.
Very concerning comment here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/comments/1lof7pr/comment/n0mvx66/
---
This sounds exactly like an eval I got. I hit up customer service about an OBVIOUS AI eval, but they thought otherwise. What is interesting though, was that prior to that, I'd mentioned it in a comment section on here. And a mod sent me this, calling it a "baseless accusation" (I had accused no one) and muted me on this sub for a week:
Absolute cinema. Expecting to get banned now. But if anyone wants, I can link the eval and script lol.
I got downvoted to hell on reddit for speaking ill of The Black List. I think its much worse than inkTip. At least the older model. Now there are two new plans. But basically, none of them are worth. I'll stick with my Pro membership and the writers room, once I can sign up for them again.
You have to remember that there are people who are putting all their faith in BL. To them, any criticism of it feels like a direct attack on their big dream. The ass kissing that goes on in the comments is something else.