Sample project — real output

Sample Revision Map

A real Siftiva analysis, kept on this page as a permanent example. The screenplay (“LAST STOP”) and its three readers are a demo project built to test Siftiva end to end — the feedback is synthetic, but the analysis below is genuine product output, not written for this page.

Demo project · synthetic reader feedback — not a real customer screenplay

Same Root Cause

Four reader notes from two readers clustered under one hypothesis about a shared structural cause, medium confidence.

Direct Contradiction

Direct contradiction

Two readers give opposite directional recommendations on the timing of the same reveal.

Evidence Check

A reader claim checked against the script: the screenplay's own facts conflict, tagged Screenplay Internal Inconsistency.

Revision Priorities

All 5, from this project’s real 42 notes.

1. The protagonist's move from controlling to genuinely attending to another person may not be staged with enough intermediate steps to feel earned.
High Priority
Two readers flagged this concern, and it sits at the center of the writer's stated theme — the discovery that control prevents recognition of what the other person needs. If that turn reads as abrupt, the thematic payoff may not register.
Where: p.3, p.6, p.7, p.11, p.12, p.13, p.16
Current-draft symptom: Maya's shift in the current draft may read as abrupt.
2. The point at which the story's key recontextualizing information arrives may not be positioned to maximize its dramatic effect.
High Priority
Two readers flagged this concern with mostly supported evidence, though one member note is marked contradicted, so the specific claims should be checked individually — reveal placement shapes when the audience understands Maya's misreading of the situation.
Where: p.5, p.6, p.9, p.10
Current-draft symptom: The placement of the Elena reveal in the current draft may be working against its effect.
3. The recurring object or behavior used to externalize the protagonist's need for control may not be established and resolved with enough clarity to carry that function.
High Priority
Two readers registered concerns here (one reader also noted something positive about the device), and several member notes are flagged as possible clarity issues, suggesting the device meant to dramatize Maya's control may not be legible enough to do that work.
Where: p.1, p.2, p.18
Current-draft symptom: The checklist device may not be set up or paid off clearly in its current form.
4. The rules constraining the setting — who can be there and for how long — may not be established clearly enough to generate reliable pressure.
High Priority
Two readers flagged this concern, though all member notes are marked as possible clarity issues rather than confirmed errors, suggesting a legibility question rather than a factual contradiction.
Where: p.3, p.7, p.8
Current-draft symptom: The logic of the station closing may not be clear as written.
5. Sequences dramatizing the protagonist's process may repeat their information without escalating, costing momentum.
Investigate
Two readers flagged this concern and most supporting notes are marked supported, indicating the repetition is observable in the text; the diagnostic may remain relevant to whatever procedural material survives a reworking, though its literal length would change.
Where: p.4, p.5, p.6, p.7, p.8, p.9
Current-draft symptom: The procedural sequence may be repetitive and longer than it needs to be.

This was one project.

Upload your own screenplay and feedback to get yours.

Analyze your feedback

Back to how the Revision Map works