Mention it if you think I am missing something, and I'll add your username and comment if I agree, else I might comment why.
- Consistency: In other words, what ever causes you wrote about should be followed by an effect. If your character loves art and teaches, he will teach art and not science, unless there is a good reason why he doesn't. Such as: there was just no opening as an art teacher or that he secretly loved science. I often find that inconsistencies are the biggest problem with stories. I saw a story on the web in which a girl ends up in a new world in another dimension, but instead of screaming out of fear, she is somehow automatically enrolled in high school there and continues her life as though nothing happened. It makes perfect sense to the writer, but not to the reader. Consistency is for the sake of the reader because the writer knows all the details.
- Good grammar and spelling: Honestly, not the most important aspect in my opinion as you could have inferred from my writing. However, "good enough" grammar and spelling should not distract the reader from understanding the story, and "perfect" grammar is left for publishing and final drafts. Starting a sentence with "but" or "and" in story writing isn't a big problem. Also, not putting ", said..." after each "" is unnecessary as long as it is formatted correctly to reduce confusion. Purposefully incorrect grammar and run-ons are not bad!!! This is a huge criticism given by others that I don't think is entirely wrong. Run-ons are common in "high" literature, and they may be used to slow down the pace of the story. I've seen short sentences often used to quicken the pace. All in all, grammar and spelling is last to be checked.
- No unnecessary information: Don't introduce a character and not use him/her. If you are going to go through all the trouble of describing the best friend of your main character then use her extensively either in the plot or to prove a point.
- For example: Missy Ariety, a charming young and slender hot women with double Ds, is so very cloistered throughout the day in her rigidly white, long lab coat. Why she does it? I don't know. But I know I will soon find out.
- I selectively described her. Her personality was not initially important and was rather for the development of the plot.
- A culmination: Every detail you mention must lead to something that has to be resolved or leads to some "A-HA!" moment.
- In other words, it was because Heathcliff was introduced to Wuthering Heights, we could understand (through the story that unfolds thereafter) the themes. By his love for Catherine and all the hatred he brought upon the Lintons and the Earnshaws he was able to show the "destructiveness of love." By his gypsyish innate difference from that of the Lintons and his marriage to Isabella, Emily Bronte (the author) was able to show the "precariousness of the upper class." - spark notes.
- It was also because of knowing the two wicked sisters of cinderella, that we are to appreciate her end in marriage to a handsome, rich prince. Don't you think that the story, Cinderella, would lose its meaning if she came from a wealthy family from another kingdom? Cynically, it will mean that rich men marry only rich women. The real story benefited by the fact that Cinderella did all the chores and was always good and kind. Good karma was built and carried on from the beginning of her story.
Less obvious matters, some are a matter of taste...
- Realism: This just makes a story relatable. The alien virtue may be based on bloodshed and war, but those are not the basis of our virtues. Philosophically, there is no good or bad in this world, but the author might have to choose what is good and what is bad. It is realistic to say that stealing is bad for human society. Choosing to go against realism must be for some good reason, and conveying an idea through literature is best done in a realistic setting. Choosing to be an alien for entertainment purposes is nice, but a reader will probably not want to think so hard remembering a huge list of contrary thoughts this alien race believes in, or the wildly different setting he lives in.
- Flatland by Edwin Abbott: A 2-D world in which people are 2-D shapes identified by their sides. As farfetched as it seems, the world still has tree, weather, trade, different types of people, towns, and houses. This is our connection to reality.
- Not too much angst: if you want to appeal to the adult population. Why? because the adult population is less hormonal than the teen population. Incredible situations of kids who rose out of the absolute worst possible shit hole, is unbelievable. It is hard enough to get out of poverty. Some may not understand the situation itself, but writing about real life experiences (such as being in poverty) adds to the realism of a story. Also, stories such as those are more within human understanding and empathy than a story about a kid who had all 5 step dads shoot themselves in the head while living in poverty with no clothes in his past, accidentally shoot himself in the leg, find his long lost mother after fending off some beasts, and find himself leader of a huge resistance group. No No NONONO! The reader will ask you to stop bullshitting him. Otherwise, make everything including the setting unbelievable. It's called magical realism, and it works successfully in "Like Water for Chocolate" by Laura Esquivel.
- Details: make a story believable. In fact, this is what Flatland depends on to make the story entertaining. Read it to understand how Abbott (the author) adds a bunch of details to visualize humans in 2-D. Details allow the reader to more willingly suspend her belief, because the less believable your world is, the more bullshit like your story becomes. It should also be a well known fact that an argument's (likewise an idea's believability) success rate increases with the amount of detail given, and from my experience, repeating relevant details helps make an idea more convincing too.
- Interaction: A lack of this make a lot of college movie projects seems lonely. Interactions aren't wholly necessary, but are probably important for entertainment based stories. Sure, a story has an overall style, but interactions (especially with an antagonist who has opposing views and mannerisms) can enhance the fairness of the actions of the protagonist. Interactions also help enhance a story's style and help prove a point i.e. a community of very different people working on a project together.
- Case in point: JUNO: Vanessa Loring played by Jennifer Garner lived in a house in which everything was in place. She was OCD, and controlling so far as to call her husband, Mark Loring (Jason Bateman) immature for playing the electric guitar. She was a foil to Juno who was immature and irresponsible (already pre-go).
- When I watched Juno, I assigned a "negative" feeling to Vanessa Loring for being overbearingly OCD and assertive of her opinion over Mark Loring.
