I'm struggling right now with this exact thing. It's just so hard to know when a script is ready. That's why you need outside, objective opinions like Scott suggests. And time. Make sure you give yourself a good enough amount of time before you really decide if a script is ready. Let yourself forget about what you've written and then go back to it with the same fresh eyes an exec or an agent will have when they read it. And be honest with yourself -- if you know there's SOMETHING not quite right about it, but you can't pinpoint it, that means that there IS something that needs to be addressed. Make sure you nail it, since no one will ever look twice.

Ben, wise counsel. And you raise a point I didn't: time. If you think you're done, set the script aside for 2 weeks, then read it again. Amazing how those 'fresh' eyes will pick up on something you totally didn't see before. Also that gut feeling you mention, knowing something's wrong, but not being to pinpoint it? Again... wise counsel.

Thanks very much, Scott. Yeah, I think you really have to trust your gut, and give yourself some credit as well -- If you know something is wrong but can't pinpoint it, it's a positive (no matter how frustrating it may be), because it shows that you have a keen understanding of the medium. That's when you need to call on those other eyes to help you out. One other bit of advice is to play it safe and send your script out to a handful of contacts at a time (even when you're "sure" it's ready); i.e., if you're trying to get an agent, maybe try your contacts at CAA and WME and wait to see if you get any feedback, which will give you a chance to discover any other problems you didn't see originally and tweak it before you send it UTA and ICM. I honestly believe that I could open up every script I've ever written every week for the rest of my life and still find something to revise. If you're lucky to get a manager because of a script you'll probably make changes before they send it to an agent. And then you'll take their notes before you try to attach a director. Then you'll probably rewrite the whole damn thing based on the director's notes when you go to cast. Then you land a star and revamp his character. Then you sell to a studio and get their comments. Then you talk to the line producer about budget and consolidate your five set pieces into three. It's a never-ending series of rewrites, and (as I think Andrew Stanton said in an interview you posted here, Scott) you have to have the balls to throw out what you know in your heart doesn't work and start again.

Developing that sense of objectivity is, imho, the single hardest skill to acquire in screenwriting. Even Bill Goldman has people who read his scripts. Moreover, it's not clear to me, that there is any consensus as to what constitutes a good script. I've read dozens of scripts for movies and TV shows that got made, and in many cases, it's hard to tell how they passed the sniff test. Still, as someone who doesn't have representation, I've thought about this problem a lot, and the solution for me, is to submit scripts to competition, especially those that give feedback. Now, competition feedback isn't a substitute for the detailed advice you might get from a professional reader, but it is the most honest response to your work because it's in their interests to find the next great script that wins its author representation. And for some contests, like the Nicholl, even placing in the semis will get you a read. In my case, I'm trying to use competition as a measuring stick for my improvement as a writer, and a way to gauge how much craft I've learned. If I get a win, I'll regard that as an indication that it's time to move up to the next level, with the sobering caveat that I had competed with people like me, who are by definition, not yet good enough to make a living.

What about those who write for TV though? Setting a written episode aside for two weeks is apparently not an option for them, given the time pressure they are under. So how can they be sure that their scripts work?

Working TV writers work in a room, with other writers, a showrunner and various producers. The support system needed is there in place. If you look at a show like the Simpsons, the writers of the first draft usually get the credit, but everyone in the room contributes. For a show like Firefly, you have Joss Whedon and Tim Minear read every script, plus feedback from people like Jane Espenson.

Alexis, although I have written five different TV projects, I've never written on a series, so what I say comes by way of talking with my TV writer friends and reading about the work. It varies from show to show, even format to format, too. But at the point you have writers on a TV staff for either a broadcast network or cable show, they pretty much have their shit together. And if something doesn't work, others in the writing staff will not only be able to identify the issues, they will know enough to take a crack at fixing it. Time is both an enemy and savior for TV writers, enemy because you're always up against it, savior because at some point, you just have to hand in the pages. And there's this: No matter how bad you may think this episode turned out... there's always another episode to balance that out.

What Pliny said.

My policy - when I'm truly and utterly sick of working on a script, I put it aside for two weeks, then re-read and make any final alterations. Your brain knows when you've done everything you can to it. But still, take the time to go over it one more time before sending, just in case...

Thanks for your replies. I should 've said I wasn't referring particularly to American TV. In many countries (like Greece where I am from) weekly series are usually written by one or two writers. Actually, there have been some 35-episode 45-minute (that is >1500 pages per year) decent Greek series written by a single writer. So there must be out there some working strategies for adapting to big time pressure.