UPDATE: It now appears as though the blog post announcing ScriptBook has been taken down. My original post follows.
Earlier today, the well-regarded site The Black List, which surfaces some of the best unproduced screenplays in Hollywood, announced the launch of ScriptBook, a new AI service for evaluating scripts:
Who is ScriptBook?
ScriptBook is a technology company that uses machine learning and natural language processing to learn about film scripts. By analyzing thousands of produced film scripts, movies and associated data, their algorithm can analyze a film script based simply on its words. By using AI, ScriptBook can provide a more objective analysis of a film script than any single human reader.
Why are we adding this product?
Our goal is to provide writers another tool to help them analyze their work. This product does not replace the evaluation service performed by our team of professional readers — instead, it offers a new, cutting-edge way to look at screenplays. It provides objective metrics and analysis on a very subjective endeavor. Our philosophy is that machine learning combined with real human taste and intuition can help us understand the world better than either alone. Increasingly, these tools are being used by studios and production companies to make decisions, so we want to offer such a tool to writers at the lowest price point possible.
For $100, ScriptBook will provide a 4-page analysis of your feature length script. The site provides a sample report for the Denzel Washington film Fences to show what a typical analysis might look like.
There are obviously lots of challenges with reading a script and offering useful suggestions for improving it. The idea that an AI could perform this analysis accurately feels pretty far-fetched. And apparently it is! Because even ScriptBook’s own analysis of Fences seems wildly off.
Film producer Keith Calder tore into ScriptBook on Twitter. I don’t think I have anything to add to this:
I have a problem with literally every paragraph and chart in this Blacklist blog post about ScriptBook. https://t.co/jKeEa0Z4YI
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
WTF is this chart? Look at the bizarre “creativity score” metric they invented. HEAT is significantly less creative than THE IRON LADY? pic.twitter.com/EAzRKXfrFW
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
Not only is this budget chart nonsensical, the idea that they are assigning “probability” to budget ranges is especially ludicrous. pic.twitter.com/QRke6ztjuu
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
“Hi, a computer said my budget is $10-20m with a 67% probability. And 34% probability it’s $5-10m. But also it can’t round numbers properly”
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
“Of the four canonical film genres of drama, crime, sport, and music my screenplay is 99% drama and 0% crime, 0% sport, and 0% music.” pic.twitter.com/WNgnmwVw0D
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
Back to the audience rating chart… Am I really supposed to believe THE AVENGERS has a lower “audience rating” than G.I. JANE? What audience? pic.twitter.com/T5FMSj3uVr
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
The sample charts are all for the FENCES screenplay. Which means ScriptBook thinks the teenage son in FENCES is only 24% likable… pic.twitter.com/4oDkEtJI1t
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
I have to wonder how it’s even possible that August Wilson was able to write “Fences” without the help of ScriptBook’s “objective” analysis.
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
But for real… The mother and son in FENCES are both under 30% “likable” but Troy (one of the least “likable” protagonists ever) gets 55%
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
If I had to create fake charts to make fun of ScriptBook, it would be hard to outdo the real FENCES analysis charts they’re actually using.
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
And how much does it cost for this 4-page shitty robot analysis of your screenplay? Only $100!
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
To be clear, I’m not opposed to using modern technology to try to improve analysis of fields that previously relied on subjective expertise.
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
For example, check out this recent story about AI beating doctors at predicting heart attacks. https://t.co/XGRmhY7rhM
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
Or the recent stories about top Go players talking about how much they’ve learned from watching the playing style of Google’s Go AI.
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017
But ScriptBook is obviously snake oil garbage masquerading as an “objective” tool. Writers and execs, please give this a hard pass.
— Keith Calder (@keithcalder) April 19, 2017