Week 5 Workshop: World bible crit

Your character and location bibles meet the class, tested for whether a stranger could reproduce them

22 March 2027

Production walkthrough: See how The Last One carried out this stage in a real production.

Before the workshop#

Bring a bible entry for every named character and location in your short. Read the Week 5 lecture first. You can use the printable bible worksheet to prepare those drafts; repeat the character and location pages as needed. The worked teaching entries show the method, including explicitly unresolved fields. They do not replace your own entries. Images are optional; this workshop requires no generation.

In the workshop#

Activity 1 — Recap and inventory (10 min)#

Instructions: State the lecture’s distinction between fixed identity and changing action state. List every named character and location in your short and match each to an entry. Read both spec bullets above before starting. Name missing entries now; use Activity 2 to fill them.

Expected output: An inventory of characters and locations, matched to drafts, with any missing entries identified.

Activity 2 — Make details repeatable (25 min)#

Instructions: Work individually through your drafts. Replace vague adjectives with observable details. Include appearance, wardrobe and voice where relevant, and spatial relationships and light for locations. Identify fixed facts separately from shot-specific changes. Resolve needed design choices; if you cannot, mark the field pending and explain what decision is needed. Record the reference/version when using one. Prioritise missing entries, then your protagonist, before refining the rest.

Expected output: Concrete character and location entries, with remaining unresolved fields visible rather than disguised by adjectives.

Activity 3 — Blind partner read-back (20 min)#

Instructions: Pair with someone who has not seen your project. Exchange only the protagonist entries, including any reference explicitly attached to the entry. Do not show the screenplay or give an oral introduction. Each reader writes and then describes the protagonist back: their appearance, costume, distinguishing detail and voice where specified. Mark unspecified facts as unknown rather than guessing. Save both accounts before either author explains anything. Split the time evenly between projects.

Expected output: A written independent account of each protagonist, recorded before author explanation. If no unfamiliar classmate is available, record that the blind criterion still needs a later check.

Activity 4 — Diagnose and revise (30 min)#

Instructions: Compare each account to the entry, not to an unspoken intention. For each mismatch, point to the relevant words and distinguish contradiction, reader omission and ambiguous or missing detail. Reread a missed fact; revise text where it leaves a necessary choice open. Do not accept an oral explanation as a repair to the entry. Apply the same audit to your other character and location entries. Record changes and any reference decisions still outstanding.

Expected output: Revised entries with specific reasons for changes, and a record of any unresolved design choices.

Activity 5 — Dailies review and recheck (25 min)#

Instructions: Share revised entries in pairs or a small group. Where possible, exchange with a new reader for another protagonist read-back. Otherwise use your returning partner and label the retest as informed by the first pass. Check a location entry too: can the reader describe where the important objects and character belong? Discuss one fixed fact and one allowed action change. This location check supports the first spec bullet; it is not an additional graded criterion.

Expected output: A second account checked against the revised entry, reader familiarity noted, and feedback on the location’s spatial clarity.

Activity 6 — Completion check (10 min)#

Instructions: Walk the two spec bullets together. Is there a concrete entry for every named character and location? Has an unfamiliar classmate correctly described the protagonist from the entry alone? Check needed pending fields and any contradicted facts before calling it complete. If only an informed retest was possible after a failed blind read, name the fresh-reader check still needed. Template completion alone is not a pass.

Expected output: Both original spec bullets verified, or a named gap with the decision or peer check needed to finish it.

Afterwards#

Keep the revised entries with your pre-production package for Week 6. Use the current agreed reference for later shots; record deliberate changes and identify which shots need updating. A consistent reference defines what to check, not a guarantee that a generated result will match it.