Working on a book review for the Spec Monkeys, so this'll hold ya. Denis McGrath over at Dead Things on Sticks has some excellent links up:
-- a link to a breakdown on the latest pilot script structure trends. Do not chase trends, by the way, as they tend to be products of individual networks' editing and broadcast quirks, but good to know.
-- Two subjects in one post: Brits are thinking about going to longer seasons. I appreciate the motivation behind this, but I think it's a mistake. 6-13 makes great TV. Period.
Also, a bit on David Shore's process on House. While some people may think this freelancer-intensive process is new, it's actually how television drama was done all during the 70's and early 80's. Useful because this is precisely how I suggested we write the show we've got in consideration over at TNT. Now I have someone else I can point to, save me some discussion time.
-- A pretty decent discussion of USA's Burn Notice. This show has been my bete noir this season, whipsawing me between my love of Donovan as an actor, some very gooey USA-tinged writing, clever spy tradecraft, and episodic directing alternating between "1980's cable TV police drama" and "seriously damn fine." It is generally cursed with a soundbed that's both treacly and omnipresent. And the act structure feels weird. But damn if I'm not there every week.
Oh, and Bruce Campbell. So, c'mon.
Friday, August 10, 2007
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Thank God for the Mainstream Press
Craig Mazin eviscerates a magnificently bad article on the current Writer's Guild/Studio negotiations from, of all places, the New York Times. The stuff in there -- "lead writer" and "junior writer", that "most screenwriters" get an upfront payment of $1 million dollars per screenplay (!!!!) ...
Boggling. For those of you not in the industry, this is roughly the equivalent of saying "Fees for teeth cleaning are split between the lead dentist and a secondary dental technician known as the Adjuct Toothologist, They are usually paid an upfront fee of warp drive crystals and a bed of golden vaginas. Then, ponies fight werewolves to determine residuals as proscribed by the ancient, inscrutable druid ways."
I am not exaggerating for effect. The Times article is precisely that stupid.
This goes into the file, by the way, for the next time I get into (another) discussion with a journalist about how the high fact-checking and editorial standards of the mainstream press are all that's keeping us from sinking into a morass of rumors and spin. It's not that I reject the mainstream press, a some people do. I just don't much care for anyone's air of infallibility. And that "air of infallibility" is the attitude carried by so many journalistic establishments* without, frankly, any decent justification whatsoever. It is often a selling point, despite cries of self-modesty.
* (EDIT: professional journalist Flynn rightfully points out in the comments I overgeneralized here in the original post, lumping in all journalists with those specifically aggrieved by the challenge to their authority and the professional establishment that to a great degree depends for their business model that you only trust X sources of information. He's right, and I apologize for the thoughtlessness.)
Many Dirty Filthy Bloggers are assholes with attitudes. But sometimes we're experts in highly specialized fields, and there's nothing constructive in getting huffy and defensive about one's career as a generalist being threatened.
(Further Note: "bed of golden vaginas" tm Warren Ellis -- in a post about me, of all things)
Boggling. For those of you not in the industry, this is roughly the equivalent of saying "Fees for teeth cleaning are split between the lead dentist and a secondary dental technician known as the Adjuct Toothologist, They are usually paid an upfront fee of warp drive crystals and a bed of golden vaginas. Then, ponies fight werewolves to determine residuals as proscribed by the ancient, inscrutable druid ways."
I am not exaggerating for effect. The Times article is precisely that stupid.
This goes into the file, by the way, for the next time I get into (another) discussion with a journalist about how the high fact-checking and editorial standards of the mainstream press are all that's keeping us from sinking into a morass of rumors and spin. It's not that I reject the mainstream press, a some people do. I just don't much care for anyone's air of infallibility. And that "air of infallibility" is the attitude carried by so many journalistic establishments* without, frankly, any decent justification whatsoever. It is often a selling point, despite cries of self-modesty.
* (EDIT: professional journalist Flynn rightfully points out in the comments I overgeneralized here in the original post, lumping in all journalists with those specifically aggrieved by the challenge to their authority and the professional establishment that to a great degree depends for their business model that you only trust X sources of information. He's right, and I apologize for the thoughtlessness.)
Many Dirty Filthy Bloggers are assholes with attitudes. But sometimes we're experts in highly specialized fields, and there's nothing constructive in getting huffy and defensive about one's career as a generalist being threatened.
(Further Note: "bed of golden vaginas" tm Warren Ellis -- in a post about me, of all things)
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
Fair Warning
When writing a DC comic book featuring the villain Giganta, a fifty-foot tall woman, do not just Google "Giganta" while trying to figure out her mass. At least not with Safe Search off.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. It's just a helluva thing to be wading through before my morning coffee.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. It's just a helluva thing to be wading through before my morning coffee.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
BOURNE structure
Hold the spoilers for the comments, please.
I liked the new Bourne. But forget for a second the sliiight over-use of shaky-cam (really? the diner scene between the reporter and his source? Couldn't have locked that off?) and all you spec-monkeys feel free to gaze in wonder at what I believe is a genuine first in film screenplay history.
Yes. A genuine first. If you don't count the Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead variation. When the moment popped, I actually sat there, open-mouthed.
Nested sequels. Sonovabitch.
Go watch Bourne Supremacy again right before you see the new one. I owe Tony Gilroy, Scott C. Burns, and George Nolfi a big scotch.
NOTE the first: I actually tried to do something like this on Cosby, of all things. I was, of course, mad.
NOTE the second: I had forgotten, until I looked at the IMDB page. Doug E. Doug's character name on the show, Griffin Vesey, comes by an extraordinarily circuitous path from Denmark Vesey. Sometimes we geeks on the staff have to amuse ourselves.
I liked the new Bourne. But forget for a second the sliiight over-use of shaky-cam (really? the diner scene between the reporter and his source? Couldn't have locked that off?) and all you spec-monkeys feel free to gaze in wonder at what I believe is a genuine first in film screenplay history.
Yes. A genuine first. If you don't count the Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead variation. When the moment popped, I actually sat there, open-mouthed.
Nested sequels. Sonovabitch.
Go watch Bourne Supremacy again right before you see the new one. I owe Tony Gilroy, Scott C. Burns, and George Nolfi a big scotch.
NOTE the first: I actually tried to do something like this on Cosby, of all things. I was, of course, mad.
NOTE the second: I had forgotten, until I looked at the IMDB page. Doug E. Doug's character name on the show, Griffin Vesey, comes by an extraordinarily circuitous path from Denmark Vesey. Sometimes we geeks on the staff have to amuse ourselves.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)