Bums on Seats

It is partly because due to a bug, that is where my bum currently is much of the time, and partly due to the fact I think I made some sense for a change that I'm taking a comment I made in the previous post and using that as the basis for this one.

''Typical UKTV concept - a family/couple/postalworkers/ hairdressers/ have some interpersonal difficulties.

Typical USA concept - A BattleStar/Serial Killer policeman/ mafia family have some interpersonal difficulties. Set against a background of Universal truth. It's in the hook.

Get people watching because of the hook, then keep them hooked with good story telling.

Simple, one would think.''

That was it. Given my normal hyperbole I think that is pretty fair comment by and large. I think UK TV is guilty of thinking it has a captive audience. Demonographers or whatever they call themselves will give execs reams of data about ABC1 viewers at 8pm and the execs will merrily set about continuing to attract that ever shrinking pot.

And lose sight of the fact that it is an ever shrinking pot because nostalgia ain't what it used to be. Most people no longer sit round the telly at night as a matter of course. We have to be drawn there. It is one of a number of different forms of entertainment, of which cable is included as a different form. The best TV from around the world [ok mostly USA] at the click of a button, unless you can't afford it, in which case the marketers aren't very interested in your views on Terrestial TV anyway.

This is a difficult time for UKTV but one of it's own making. Times change. The balance of programming has to change. My belief right now is that there is far too much writer/producer/exec mutual wank festing going on where we end up with a heap of cheapo relationship dramas bereft of any real reason why someone who didn't know said writer/producer/exec would actually sit down and watch it.

Give me a concept I dig. Execute it well. Then I might make an appointment. That's how you get bums on seats.

Meet Bill Martell

An open invitation to join Bill for a few beers tonight MONDAY 9th July.

7,30 pm outside Holborn Tube.

A Father Figure Who Does Oral

Wow, this might be an NC 17 post. Or X rated as my generation calls it. Apologies to my writer mate who is nicking the line for a script lol, but my standard joke answer to ''what do women want'' also strikes me as a good, non gender orientated mode of behaviour for writers with regards to their relationship with producers.

A father figure is stable, balanced, circumspect, is willing to compromise and will do what is best for the good of the family/project.

He's also willing to give his missus a bit of pleasure just to make her feel good.

But sometimes the father figure has to say enough is enough. Kids are getting out of hand or his tongue gets cramp.

Knowing when to say enough is enough and actually being listened to depends on the gravitas you have built up and if you can actually enounciate ''enough'' with a tongue cramp.

A rant a day helps you work rest and.......retire

I rant because I am. It's what makes me who I am. I rant against the system in this blog. That is nothing compared to how much I rant against myself. That is what inspires me.

I don't analyse why I write. I write because I do. I despise the politics of TV and Film. Great entertainment generally gets made despite the infrastructure not because of it. My aged teeth help me live with it but not agree with it.

But I keep doing it. I am fit for nothing else. It is a compunction. I've earned a living for a good number of years as a writer. Most of what I've written is shit. Well paid shit but still shit. To someone trying to break in that sounds like manna from heaven.

But here is the downright truth. If you think breaking in is hard then try finding a current blog from a newbie poster in 3 years time. Breaking in is hard. Multiply it by a few factors to get what a career is.

That's not egoism on my part. I don't give a crap about ego. I know any writer is only as good as their last script. That's what I love about it. I know when my last script was crap. And I know it was obviously someone elses fault.

Definitely.

And I need that assuredness to make me a good writer.

Maybe?

Definitely?

Could be?

Ah hell, Popeye said it all. I ams what I ams.

Will the last viewer to leave please turn off the TV

So ITV has lost 5.4% of it's year on year audience in the first half of 2007. That doesn't sound a lot but it is brown pants time for the execs.

I can fully understand the decrease in viewers. Sure they've had some hits like X Factor and UK Has Talent or whatever it's called. But in the drama field? Can you think of any remotely stand out ITV series? Primeval maybe? Any of those 9pm one and two parters have any more resonance than a fart in a hurricane?

Where are the 'Life On Mars' and the Spooks and Hustles? The State of Plays and The State Within's? As for comedy, do they actually have a comedy department?

One of ITV's problems stems from the fact that producers have no idea what they are looking for. Network Centre held a meeting a few months back to try to give some indication. But producers and agents I have spoken to left the meeting more confused than before. The net result is ITV becomes the last port of call when pitching projects.

Blue Murder replaced the ailing Tycoon but faired little better with a miserable 2.4 million at 9pm. I think it deserves better figures than that but the 9pm ITV slot has become a ghost town with viewers and that is very hard to turn round.

Soap and Reality is what ITV is surviving on at the moment. The danger is it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

To Mars and beyond!

I see a lot of blog buzz about Red Planet's £5000 competition. On one hand I applaud any initiative that offers a way in to the biz. On the other I say to Tony Jordan make it £20,000 so I know it's not just a self publicity gimmick.

No pro writer gets out of bed for 5 grand. And so far if you are not one of Tony's EastEnders mates you have little chance of getting on his shows. That's understandable. And I accept that.

But I hate the crap that goes on on network TV. When a writer with power has a chance to make a difference - then make a difference for fuck's sake. I hope he does.

A summer dip

TV loses about a third of it's audience in the Summer months. Quite understandable really, who's going to stay in on a gorgeous summer night when a BBQ is beckoning. It's why the movie industry also uses the summer months to release all the arty crap they have on their books and save the blockbusters for February. Yoiks! It's also obviously the reason why the networks keep their real goodies for the cold dark winter months as we huddle round our parrafin heaters searching for escape.

Viewing hours per week peak at around 32 in the Winter and dip to around 22 in the Summer. That is a mighty whack and plays havoc with the commercial networks who rely on advertising revenue - linked to ratings. Maybe they should take a leaf out of the movie industry books? Maybe, rather than buying into a self fulfilling prophecy?

It is also the reason why year round shows like The Bill are so important, as is the networks ceaseless search for long running drama. The Holy Grail. Which is why Holby Blue has been given another chance despite not breaking into the top thirty.

But sometimes I think the BBC forgets it doesn't have the same ratings pressure as the commercial channels. Or rather they have a self imposed ratings pressure to prove who's got the biggest swinging dick. I read a quote by Tony Jordan saying Holby Blue was attempting to push back the boundaries of pre-watershed TV.

All credit to him. A creator should always be willing to go in to bat for his programme. And maybe that is what he is trying to do. But I think he has been saboutaged by the BBC doing what they do best. Hugely underestimating the audience.

The crass sacrificing of Holby City to a Thursday night slot pissed off a lot of Holby City fans. Holby is a non-brand, despite what the marketers might be saying. Very few people watching Holby City care that it is supposed to be a spin-off from Casualty.

I honestly think they would have been much better calling Holby Blue a generic cop name and having nothing to do with Holby. But in a land where the marketers seem to have ascendency over the creatives [pretty much all of showbusiness] I am pissing against the wind here. But hell, that's the writers lot.

Net result though - Holby City loses a million viewers overnight and Holby Blue doesn't appear on the top thirty radar.

The audience is not dumb. I am the fucking audience. You good people who are kind enough to read and post here are the fucking audience. I may not be smart but I can spot a phoney move when I see it. And resent it sufficiently to tune out. As many of you obviously have.

Jesus Joney Macaroni

True Dare Kiss ''won'' the ratings with 4.4 million at 9 pm.

There's a headline from Broadcast to chill the soul if ever I heard one.

Location Location Location got 4.8 million.

Enough already with the relationship dramas. WE DON'T GIVE A SHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Unless maybe it's about a chef buying a house.....abroad...... at an auction......against the clock.....and we vote on it.

TV drama nowadays has to be more than something I can see out my window any day of the week. Talk To Me, The Chase, Waterloo Road, mindless fucking pap. Don't get me wrong, there is a place for mindless fucking pap but only as part of a calorie controlled diet as they say. If that's all you eat you're heading for a stroke. And that's pretty much all that's on the menu it seems.

I watched an episode of ER this morning. It was fantastic. A real moral and ethical question at stake. Innovative writing and production. I caught two minutes of Casualty on Saturday. Nothing happened.

Perhaps I am part of the MTV generation with a short attention span. Or perhaps I am part of the generation not willing to accept space filling dross as entertainment?

I'm plumping for the latter.

What the hell has got to happen

...before TV execs get it into their heads that something is rotten in the State of Primark? Land of cut price TV.

Jeckyll lost a million plus viewers on Saturday. Time of Your Life a whopping 2 million plus. I can't comment on the quality because I've watched neither. But I respect the writers hugely. So I'd be interested to hear any comments on either.

But as ratings in general continue to spiral downwards I can't help thinking that a comment made by Zigster in the previous post hits the nail on the head. Much of what is on is bland middle of the road PC inspired pap. And I'd also guess a lot of that is foisted on the writers and not their choice.

You hear some of the old school writers talk wistfully about the heady days of the 70's and 80's when the writer was king. Can you imagine a script editor or producer or network exec telling Dennis Potter or Alan Plater or Troy Kennedy Martin what should and shouldn't be in their scripts? Very changed days my friends I can assure you.

The current and recent regimes seem to be of the opinion that a writer is a disposable asset to be moulded and shaped into their way of thinking. A mercenary to be indoctrinated and pointed in the right direction to fight the battle they are incapable of fighting. It is their issues and agendas that are pushed. There is no question in my mind that creativity is being stifled by those at the top. Save your arse TV might save your arse for a short time. But drama is about taking risks and I see little evidence of that.

It is this one size fits all mentality that is destroying UK TV. Nero was an amatuer compared to these guys.

Writers work on confidence. Confidence gives them voice. Voice is what distinguishes good drama. A bunch of cloned script eds and execs with the mentality that it is their script and you are just the hired gun does not inspire confidence.

Unfortunately given the total guff that has been on screen recently I now can't actually be bothered to watch any UK drama. Jeckyll and Time of Your Life may be excellent for all I know, but until I hear that they are I'm not going to put my self through the horror of another disappointment.

Too much Eostragen?

.... was something my agent said the other day [the male one] in response to what is wrong with British TV. Now I've never really thought about it in those terms before and I don't think I agree. I'm certainly not going off on a Sir Patrick Moore rant but it does give food for thought.

Jana Bennett - BBC Director of Vision [whatever the hell that is] Jane Tranter Controller BBC Fiction, Lucy Lumsden -Controller BBC Comedy. ITV Network Centre dominated by women. The Bill, Doctors, Casualty and a host of others exec produced and largely script edited by women.

In case anyone thinks I'm off on a mysoginistic screed I thought long and hard before posting this. Again let me say I don't think I agree, but it is something that perhaps should be discussed and the day I self censor on PC grounds is the day I quit blogging.

The main reason I don't think I agree, certainly as far as exec producers go, is I've dealt with some who have a lot more balls than some of their male counterparts. But at the same time I can't help wondering why it is that the young male audience is what the networks crave and yet make such a hash of attracting?

I think it is a fact that women tend to watch more drama than men. But is that because the drama being produced is more female-centric? Or is female-centric drama being produced because that is naturally the bigger audience? Would more male-centric drama entice male viewers back? Or have we stopped tuning in because our tiny minds are engrossed elsewhere in a cornucopia of distractions?

So many questions. But here's a point to ponder. In most sit- coms the male is portrayed as the bumbling buffoon and the female the stable voice of reason. And most sit-coms are written by males. Perhaps we are our own worst enemies?

The business of show

A very rich man and big risk taker once told me his philosophy in business. ''If you owe the bank ten thousand pounds you've got a problem. If you owe them ten million, they've got a problem.''

It was just after hearing that Holby Blue has been commissioned for a second [and bigger] series that this came into my head for some reason.

Because a bank will not hesitate to pull the plug on Joe Schmoe and his small fry, and therefore non career threatning debts, but how do you think Enron and Robert Maxwell got away with it for so long?

Now, maybe Holby Blue is a grower. 8 eps is not a long run to build an audience on what is hoped is a long running show. But given that it seems to be failing to even break into the top thirty ratings wise [as of June 10th, maybe ratings have improved] you've got to be thinking that particular recommission was more to do with personality, reputation, and BBC politics rather than what the audience actually wants to watch, Much like the second series of New Street Law.

HBO are producing some of the best TV around right now. I think that has got to be because the audience vote with their hard earned cash. It concentrates the mind and leaves no room for empire building.

This is a business. Like a clothes shop. We are the customer. We might not like some of the products but if we think we can still find something of good quality and style that we love we'll keep coming back.

I haven't found much to love lately. Apart from the excellent Trawlermen. More addictive and emotional than a bagfull of the latest 'dramas' .

I pitched a drama series about fishermen a while back. Was told it was too expensive and nobody was interested in fishing boats. Hey ho.

The Academy

No, not the Oscars. The BBC Writers Academy. From what I understand a number of writers are taken on, given a salary and guaranteed at least one ep of Casualty EastEnders, Holby and Doctors. They shadow exisiting writers, learning the ropes and then press on with their own episodes.

I think that's the bones of it. I may be wrong. And to me it sounds like a good thing. With so few avenues available for the new writer to break in this sounds like a great opportunity.

However, I hear rumblings. This being the BBC it seems to have taken on a political aspect. Academy writers are allegedly being given more than the one ep guarantee on orders from above. Read The Yorkie Bar Kid.

This is pissing off both script editors, who have a lot more hand holding to do, and existing writers because it is taking bread out of their mouths. I guess it also engenders a degree of resentment because those exisiting writers had to come through the trenches, not be handed the keys to the kingdom.

But times change, and overall I like the idea that the door has been opened a little. But I have a proviso. There is another Academy, one run by Paul Abbot. I have no idea how you get on it. But bearing in mind his comment on the BBC Academy which was basically ''They are training writers to write shit'' Given the choice I know which Academy I'd be trying to get in to.

I also know that if I were a new writer offered a place on the BBC Academy I'd snap their hand off.

Ratings and Rantings

I'm looking at the BARB figures for week ended 3rd June. And if I'm scratching my head then you can bet that network execs are shitting their pants. I'm intrigued. They are seeing their pensions flying out the window. Well apart from the BBC where failure upwards is the preferred method of promotion.

I wrote my last episode of Casualty maybe 18 months ago. Close on 10 million viewers. [See the Writers Guild blog and Gregory Evans' ballsy Casualty post for an insight into how disposable we writers are] For week ended 3rd June? 6.3 million.

Holby City, which used to push Casualty in the ratings is down to 5 million. [Okay blame the Yorkie Bar Kid for screwing with the scheduling so he could pimp the abysmal Holby Blue]

The Bill [ used to write for this too, around 7 million if I recall] 3rd June? 4.3 million.

BBC's biggest non soap drama? Are visions of blue police boxes flashing through your head? Well close. Hypothermically blue policemen would be closer, because it is New Tricks with a whopping 8.5 million.

I think it is quite watchable by the way and I don't care if you make jokes about my incontinence pants.

The Chase was equalled by BBC2 live nature programme Springwatch. Nuff said.

Here's the English Dave solution. Give the vast majority of the population a reason to come back to network TV. Get rid of the apparatchicks and get creative people making creative shows.

You know the main reason I'm scratching my head? I can't understand how they've screwed it up so badly. How they've let the most powerful medium the world has ever seen be relegated to a Woolworths pick n mix. Some are okay but mostly you have a bag full of crap.

Notes That Don't Make Music

Ah yes, the thorny subject of notes. Script Eds and Development Execs vary from show to show and company to company in their approach. Their brief, whether instructed or of their own volition can vary wildly in the detail of the notes given. From the broadest strokes on structure and tone to micro-managing every scene including their own take on dialogue.

How you deal with these notes, and note givers, goes a long way to determining your length of career.
Here's what not to do. Don't phone them up immediately after reading the notes and say -

''Who the fuck do you think you are? This is how I make my living. You've been in the job 2 minutes and you're telling me what to do? If you want to be a writer then fuck off and be one and stop ruining my script with your crap dialogue suggestions and take on character motivation. You wouldn't know motivation if it jumped up and bit your arse.''

Tempting I know, but it doesn't work for you as often as you might think. You see, it's all about the balance of power. If you want to move through the ranks it is not only a case of picking your battles, it is also a case of making them think it is an honourable draw when you win.
This months shavetail script ed is next months producer. Well, not quite but you get the drift. It's a small world and over the years I've seen a receptionist becoming a producer in eight years. And she likes me because I was always nice to her when she was a receptionist.

So, real life example. On Friday I got 2nd draft notes. I read them Friday night and to be honest wasn't overly impressed. 70% is suggested dialogue ''tweaks'' I.e ''this is what I would write if anyone would actually pay me to write.''

Damn I promised myself I wouldn't be sarky.

As a whole I reckon that about 15% of the notes help the script. 55% don't matter a damn to me either way as they are largely continuity issues arising from changes to previous episodes and 30% actively set the script back in my view.

Okay, what to do? Well the first thing to do is take a deep breath and not lift the phone. Think about what is being said and why. For example I know that several of the suggested dialogue changes I have been given are because the script ed has seen a line that looks jarring or out of context but hasn't recognised how it will play rather than read. Writers write with all the characters quirks, motivations and psychology in their head, and how that plays on screen, some script eds can't or don't read with the same viewpoint. A quick explanation on the phone and a ''wryly'' here and there will fix those.

The same related aspect goes for visual moments. A picture does paint a thousand words, but some script eds can't see past the words on the page. They read scripts like a novel, forgetting the potency of a visual. For a certain type of script ed, everything has to be explained in dialogue. Hopefully you won't come up against many of those but they are there, believe me. It is a writer 101 no -no, but they are not writers. Heck they are barely script eds.

I've identified the notes I have problems with. I've analysed why and come up with reasoned arguments or alternative suggestions. And on Monday I'll phone for a light hearted chat about it.

I'll be aiming for the honourable draw.

Don't get me wrong, I'm talking here about those times when problems arise. That isn't always the case.

Nice to end on a positive note!

45 Minute Focus

Okay, I didn't quite make the hour. I have various excuses at the ready. Gorgeous Blonde is car shopping today. She has a Mazda ''something'' sporty little thing with the weird back doors? She's changing it for something else that I think begins with T and might have 6 in the number. She did say, but cars are an area where my eyes glaze over. I just want something that starts when I turn the key and gets me where I want to go.

Needless to say, given my obvious level of expertise she feels she needs to call and text me at regular intervals to make sure my opinion of trim, options, finance and horsepower are taken into account. I drive a 14 year old Citroen. Nuff said.

Then I had a flash of inspiration of how to play the Manchester Cathedral level of Fall Of Man on ''Hard'' level. However, as it turned out The Very Reverend Rogers Govender was not an option on my weapons list.

Writer mate and I then bitched about a show, the industry, had a laugh and generally shot the breeze for a considerable length of time. The collective noun is indeed ''a bitch of writers''

But...... in my intense 45 minutes I firmed up the premise, got the theme and the 4 main characters. I call that a good day. I would have an ending too if I had made up my mind how long it was going to be. A movie? A two parter? A series? Don't know yet. But I feel so good I may even look at the notes I got at 5.30 on a Friday with a deadline for Monday. I know production need like 3 months to get their shit together when the most important part of the whole process is rushed through in an obscenely short space of time but.........oooops bitch bitch bitch!

One Hour Focus

My mind wanders easily. I don't beat myself up about it because I know that everything I see, hear, think or read will eventually find it's way into something I write in one form or another. But it is not particulary helpful when you wake up with the bones of a premise in your head and a day when you have other things pressing on you.

So I promise myself one hour. One hour of intense concentration. No internet, no email, no coffee no phone. Just me a pen and paper. I know from experience that in that one hour I will achieve much more than a whole day flapping around.

But it is very important that intense concentration is achieved. Not the half hearted ''I'll sit down and think about this'' With that, what tends to happen is when you hit a snag you give up and move on to the other pressing matters.

Intense concentration takes will power. And about an hour is all I can manage. But it will be by far the most valuable hour I spend today.

As far as writing is concerned, to my mind the time factor is always about quality more than quantity.

Ego - good or bad?

As you can probably tell, I slam down these posts in a stream of consciousness. There are spelling and grammar mistakes galore. And they are way more haphazard than most [but not all] paid writing I would submit.

Some might think that's because I don't care. Actually it is the opposite. This is my time. If people want to read this, and God bless the 100 or so a day of you die hards who do, then I think it is only right that you get the raw material not the sanatized 3 rewrite version. I'm ugly enough to take 'hey you spelled sanatized wrongly' and trade it off against emotional truth.

To be fair not once has anyone intimated that. Something that continues to make me want to post.
But someone, somewhere is thinking ''Man he has some ego on him, what makes him think he has anything valuable to say''

And the truth is I have nothing valuable to say other than explain how I feel about a given situation. That might resonate with others in the same position or help those who have yet to encounter that situation. Writers are always learning. Always.

I posted ealier about confidence. Confidence and Ego could be cousins.

But confidence is always good. Ego is good too but can be destructive when it blinds you to commercial realities.

Your Ego has to be a friend. One who tells you which battles to fight and even if you lose and it all goes tits up, then comforts you that you did the right thing.

But if your Ego throws you in a cage with a 300 pound chainsaw wielding psycho at every opportunity, then I'd rethink the company you keep.

I am saddened

Because a very good friend of mine has just quit a show. This is a show that went through some troubled times and needed someone from the creative side to speak up. He did. Got changes made. One of which was a new producer promising a new spirit of cooperation between production and script and a much more writer friendly environment.

This is a writer with 70 plus episodes of network TV under his belt on several different shows. He's paid his dues and more. But the apparatchiks have driven him out. The politics and general idiocy of those in charge of the show but with no discernable talent other than climbing the network greasy pole, were stifling him and his sense of what made him a writer.

Criticism is part of the writer's lot. But disillusionment with the whole set up is when it is time to go. He decided it was that time.

I'll miss you mate.

My Day

In the spirit of Danny Stack and Dom's blogs I thought I would post on my day today as a working writer.

7.15 am shower, breakfast watch BBC News.

8.35 Take son to school. Go for walk and smoke a couple of fags.

8.50 Watch Frasier

10.oo Start to read 'The Secret'' by Rhonda Byrne

10.10 That's enough of that crap.

10.15 -11.45 Read Blogs

12.00 Go for walk and smoke a couple of fags.

12.30 Have idea for a drama based on an update of an Emile Zola novel.

1300 Realise I can't be arsed.

1306 Play Fall Of Man on son's PS3

1500 Decide I better stop fannying around and do something.

1501 Read some more blogs

1530 Watch Two and A Half Men on Paramount

1700 Go to pick son up from School.

1735 Begin cooking Stirfry

1736 Get telephone call from BBC script ed asking if I can take notes on a script over the phone. The ones I've been hanging round the house all day for .

1737. Back to stirfry having told BBC script ed to call back tomorrow, I'm cooking and the deadline is next Wednesday.

1900 Blog.

Don't get me wrong, not all days are as busy as that.

Confidence

Years ago, while trying to catch a break as a writer I put gruel on the table by script reading. I read all sorts from HW A listers to first time bedroom scribblings in green ink. It was a great learning tool. Mostly in how not to write screenplays. But that is valuable in itself.

But the greatest lesson I learned from all the good scripts I read was that truly great writers [to me anyway] exhibited a confidence on the page. They knew exactly what they were doing, where they were going, how they were saying it, and most of all didn't give a shit what anyone else thought about it. There were no obseqious platitudes handed out. No flowery 'please like me' touches. Just a drive and determination to tell a story that they were 100% committed to.

Now I'm not one for screenwriting jargon. Probably because I don't know my MDQ from MDF and I'm sure USP has something to do with computers. But to me - that is VOICE. That is the writer speaking to you from the pages. You can feel the energy of the moment it was written.

From the carefully phrased line of dialogue or action that exquisitely captures the moment, to the pace and tone and love of characters. And that takes confidence.

The writer BELIEVES. Is IMMERSED. And has the TALENT and SKILL to get that on the page and suspend your disbelief.

So to me - confidence is a basic requirement of a writer.

Of course, the writer's career has more ups and downs than a streetwalker's knickers. One week you are lauded to the hills, the next told to take that piece of crap and start over. But through all that you have to retain that inner core of confidence. Because that is your voice. And it will come out in whatever you write.

On a show I write on I reckon about 6 out of 10 times I can guess who the writer is after watching 10 minutes. They have a distinguishable voice and the episodes are usually good. On the ones where I can't guess the writer the episodes generally aren't so good.

They lack that - confidence?

Pop Quiz

Who is the most depressing blogger?

No I kid. That's too easy. lol

Out for a walk today between computer crashes and I met Gym Buddy who I hadn't seen in six months. Mainly because I haven't been to the gym in six months.

Gym Buddy was a biggish name quiz show host. We kinda know some names at the higher echelons and have both been in the biz long enough to roll our eyes at some of the names.

He is early to mid fortyish and had some interesting things to say - completely unbidden by me.

He doesn't watch any UK drama. But makes a point of watching Shark, Desperate Housewives, Entourage, and House. Because he likes fast paced shows that don't treat him like an idiot - which means dialogue cut to the bone and the story told as visually as possible.

He hates reality shows because they are train wreck tv rather than affirming tv. Even if that affirmation is in the skill of delivery rather than the ultimate ''message''.

A good quiz show format is like a good drama because both need to have the audience caring what happens next.

It seems to me you can plug those opinions into what makes any good entertainent. Movies thrive on those ethos.

I try to watch as much as I can even if I have to have a sick bag handy. Like the latest Big Brother. I'm old enough to know that no matter how long I watch there is no chance of a tasteful flash of vag from the Barbie twins or the sudden death of the opinionated old bird so 10 minutes is quite enough for me thank you. Nothing to see here folks. Unless you are a pre-pubescent wondering how a guy deals with 11 girls rather than just thinking ''lucky bastard'' and flicking over to Late Night Poker. I'd love to see the demongraphics for BB. I'd guess the weighted average age of viewers was about 20. That takes into account the aged insomniacs and terminal masturbators.

At least it's got the twentysomethings actually watching TV. But wouldn't it be good if they were watching something that actually meant something more than ''how can I get on TV and make a fast buck just by being famous for being famous''

One can but dream.

When the going gets tough

Those times when in the face of adversity [some producers, networks, script editors, directors and even the occassional 1st AD] you wonder what the hell you are doing and why the hell you are doing it, a writer needs a mantra. Here's the one I go to. A little cliched perhaps but it works for me, maybe it will help someone else. With thanks to Rudyard Kipling for this and the cakes.


If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:
If you can dream--and not make dreams your master,
If you can think--and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:
If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings--nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much,
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And--which is more--you'll be a Man, my son!
--Rudyard Kipling

I substitute Writer for Man. That does the trick.

Hustle

I like this show. Ok some of the cons are a bit pony but the characters are engaging and it is a pacey hour. Also, they like to throw in a few tricks like last night's Manga style inserts about the blowfish, or Danny becoming Bruce Lee in his imagination. All good stuff.

But here's what I really get from the show. From what comes out on screen I feel the people involved actually seem to enjoy making it . That isn't as common as you might think. Between budget issues, production issues, creative issues, network issues and the sheer grind of getting something on screen it seems to me that too often what appears has a bland and jaded feel to it.

As a big name writer on a popular show told my mate ''I'm just an old slapper. Every episode I tell myself that's the last one. Then the phone rings.''

It's one of the reasons that Exec producers only tend to last 3 or 4 years on a show at most. The burst of enthusiasm they go in with lasts about that long before the shine wears off and it becomes a chore.

Hopefully that will never happen to you as a writer. You can always find something to really enthuse about in a script if you look for it.

Who Are These People?

The ones who make decisions like moving Holby in a cynical marketing ploy so they can shove Holby Blue in it's spot and hope nobody notices? Well a couple of million viewers noticed. Because that's about how many Holby lost as a result of the move.

Are they the same people who decided 'Castaway' was a good idea? Did no one tell them that ''Shipwrecked' works for C4 because of the amount of young female flesh on display? Who wants to see a bunch of mostly middle aged hippies bickering? Certainly not most middle aged viewers, who it must have been aimed at.

Are they the same people who thought there was a huge difference between 'A Place In The Country' ' Homes Under The Hammer' ''Location Location, Location' and every other property show where in fact the only real difference is the lame attempts at tension they introduce.


Are they the same people who think that the UK viewing public are happy with a steady diet of middle of the road, comfy TV? Throw in a Jane Austen, a nice detective, a middle aged lawyer moving to the country and ''something with sirens but is really about the characters emotional lives'' and you've pretty much got the schedules covered.

I'd like to go on but my cocoa is ready, my slippers warming and I'm pretty sure I can catch a re-run of Rosemary and Thyme somewhere.

Lowest Common Denominator

I hate spammers. I hate them with a vengeance. Spammers are like cold callers but at least I can get revenge on cold callers by pretending I'm interested for a few minutes thus depriving them of time to move on to the next sucker. A small victory, granted.

I've just instigated word verification on this blog, and I hate that I have to. But I have to because dipshit scumbags are bombarding this site. My apologies. I want to post what I want, where I want and on many occassions don't because I have to jump through hoops to do so.

Please bear with me. I feel bad about letting the ignorant people win.

Playing Piano In A Brothel

.........Would earn you more money than writing. It's official. Well not in so many words but ALCS have a survey out showing that 10% of UK writers [and German for some reason] earn 50% of the dosh while 30% of writers earn less than the average wage.

Now while I admit I am of the school of Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics that is the kind of statistic that strikes fear into would be screenwriters. And it shouldn't. If you look behind it a couple of things come to mind. Firstly the survey seems to be conducted with ''writers'' including novelists, playwrights, poets and every shade in between. The vast majority of writers are novelists, playwrights, poets and every shade in between. The vast majority of novelists, playwrights, poets and every shade in between are very poorly paid.

The vast majority of film and TV writers aren't. So I'd figure that a lot of that top 10% were screenwriters. But before any smug smiles about career choice appear here is a very sobering thought.

There are some 20 thousand odd novels published every year in the UK. 20 thousand chances to strike gold, build a career. There are maybe 2 thousand hours of drama [in a very good year] Most of which are filled by established writers.

The costs of entry for a new writer are so much less for a novel than a TV show or movie. So the risk to publishers[producers] is much less. A novelist is not going to see anything he hasn't written or agreed with appear in print. A novelist isn't going to have their work compromised by physical production issues.

So you pays your money and you takes your choice. Writing a novel would bore me shitless which is why I haven't done it. But that's just me. David Balducci had many scripts rejected before he decided to attack HW through the novel route. Worked for him.

Think about it. It might work for you.

When to shut up.

A writer mate of mine, and I know he reads this blog but no apologies for my personal round of applause, decided enough was enough. A bunch of inexperienced no-nothing yahoohs were leading a show down the short and winding road to cancellation.

This guy has nore dramatic savvy in his wettest fart than anyone running the show has. But boy, earning big bucks from keeping your head down and giving them what they want or speaking up and being sent to Siberia, costing you many thousands of squids? That's a dillemma. And sent to Siberia was what would happen on this show given the personalities involved.

Every pro writer knows that editorial changes are par for the course. But here we are talking
direction of the show, not run of the mill editorial changes. And when that happens the good writer who has the experience to know what works speaks up. He could have been sacked. As it turned out he wasn't. In fact he did himself a lot of good thanks to top level exec changes he wasn't aware of at the time.

You can take the money and run but ultimately all a good writer has is his integrity. Well done mate, you know who you are.

Return To Sender

I had my first ever ''returned unread'' a few days ago. My agents sent a major prodco a project of mine. They sent it back unread saying they had an existing project in a similar vein and so felt it innapropriate to read my material in case of any perceived cross contamination.

Fair comment. But you know what? I'd prefer if they actually read it. I don't give a stuff about cross contamination or knicking projects. I'm not saying it never happens, but the incidence is so rare it isn't worth bothering about. And anyway, watchagonnado if it happens? So I'd have liked them to read it to see if I was coming at it in the same way they were and maybe get a gig on the show. But there you go.

I see Casualty got it's long service award at the Baftas. Good on it. 21 years and still going strong....ish.

Chatting with a writer mate the other day about the demongraphics. When we are even older than we are now will we be sitting down with a nice cup of tea to watch Midsommer Murders with the rest of the 61 year olds? Don't really know the answer to that. But if we're not then the networks are going to find their current core drama audience literally going up in smoke.

Demongraphics.

Yes it was deliberate. Because statistics are the way devil worshipping execs keep themselves in a job. John Yorke freely admitted that Holby Blue had virtually nothing to do with Holby but the name was a cynical exercise to market a new cop show.

THE AUDIENCE ISN'T DUMB. Or rather the POTENTIAL audience isn't dumb. And for the head of drama at the BBC to come out with crap like that isn't exactly a wizzard show, Biggles.

Holby Blue was trounced in the ratings by Midsummer Murders. But as far as demongraphics are concerned here is a very sobering thought. The average age of the 28% share of viewers of Midsummer Murders was 61. The average age of the 24% share of Holby Blue was 47.

Clear proof that we are living longer. Or maybe it just feels like it?

Cinema Is Dead

..... or so they keep saying. They said it in the fifties when TV became popular. They said it in the eighties when video came around. And they said it in the nineties with DVD and Home Cinema.

But it still seems to be here? And revenue is pretty much growing year on year. And you don't hear too many complaints about audience fragmentation like you do in TV? I suppose some of that is due to the fact that the studios are responsible for some of the TV audience fragmentation. Who's going to watch some ropey old drama on TV when the latest blockbuster can be viewed in the comfort of your own armchair? God bless DVD.

I've posted before about the economics of HW. In 1984 the studios made a 2.2 Billion dollar loss on theatrical releases. Seriously. 2.2 Billion dollar LOSS!!!!! That sounds like a business you don't want to be in. Unless you know they made a 30 BILLION DOLLAR PROFIT !!!!! from DVD and TV sell through. Now it begins to make a little sense. Especially as they have gipped the talent out of their fair share of that pot of gold - but that's another story. See, Studios evolved and built a new business model where they could actually take advantage of the competition.

TV has to make that same leap of evolving if it wants to stay as the market leader in home entertainment. The guys in pony tails will bang on about how evolving means web content and user interfaces and all that crap. Complete red herring. The one and only truth is that if you want people to watch the show, they have to want to watch it. The fact that some fanboy can pose a question to an actor or vote on the colour of the hero's car is meaningless if he is the only fanboy watching. [ Apropos of Will Dixon's excellent post]

In my opinion TV has to cater for those who don't visit show websites. That is their audience. The vast majority of us. And we are a fickle bunch. We know from Ep 1 if a show is crap or worth sticking with. If we like it we'll make a vague committment to sit down next week and watch. If it continues to entertain we'll firm it up a bit and make it required viewing. If it really touches us in whatever way we may possibly buy the box set.

If it doesn't entertain, it is gone. Dead. History. Doesn't matter how many marketing gimmicks you throw our way. We can smell a stinker. You can make a corpse twitch by shoving a few thousand volts through it, but it will never play the piano again .

So what can TV do to compete? Make better programmes. Because by doing so you will be able so sell them internationally, which will give you more money to make better programmes, which will enable you to sell internationally, which will .........well you know where I'm going.

Diversity

That's a word that probably doesn't figure highly in writer's minds, but is way up there in the lexicon of BBC Buzzwords. So is worth mentioning for that alone.

Essentially the BBC want to see more minorities on screen. I couldn't agree more. Though I'd rather see the diversity in the ranks of writers, producers and directors first. Otherwise you have a lot of 'whitebread writing street' scenes, to use a shorthand.

I don't have a lot of time for quotas. And throwing minorities into a show just to make up the numbers rather than actually investigating the issues and stories which can be dramatically portrayed to give everyone a better understanding of that minority seems like a waste of time.

There is the argument that you integrate the minority character and make them just like any other, and that is fine. But minorities are different. That's is why they are labelled minorities. And before any dipshit BNP wally dives in, I'm talking about celebrating and sharing those differences. I love that different groups of people feel and act differently depending on their cultural background. And as a writer I want to understand why. So I can write it. Those small differences are interesting to me.

If I were writing a movie about the Williams Sisters or Tiger Woods or Shilpa Shetty or I should be so lucky - Nelson Mandella or Martin Luther King I would want to get behind the minds. What shaped and influenced them and why whitebread like me still actually thinks in terms of minorities? Or maybe I don't?

Diversity - Good! Diversity for the sake of it - Not as good.

Jasper Carrott sitcom about a one legged black lesbian miner - or something like that - not good at all.

RADIO TIMES

Okay I usually only buy this to flick through the TV schedules to see who is writing or producing what. I tend to ignore the commentary and fluff pieces, especially the blatent programme marketing. But there is usually something very interesting, and what is more, completely unbiased to be had out of some of the features.

I hadn't even reached the schedule pages of this week's edition when a few things struck me. Firstly Holby Blue didn't figure in the RT Recommends for the week [ but is RT choice on the day, so can I assume they are different people recommending weekly and daily or can I assume that because the weekly recommend is for shows post Holby Blue time slot they are one and the same person?]

I always read the Alison Graham column. Her Bafta thoughts this week are pretty much the same as mine. And she has never been afraid to knock BBC programmes.

And the ''What I'm watching'' section is always interesting. This week Angus Deayton, after listing his viewing choices, says '' Hearing all this might make you think I don't watch British programmes - and you'd be right''

Join the club Angus. Join the club. And he is one of a long line expressing similar views. Maybe, just maybe, someone at the BBC, reading a BBC publication, will actually register this.

You can make TV for the pipe and slipper brigade, that's fine. No problem. It's a genuine market. But it is not the only market. And far from the biggest and most important market. The one that doesn't require snuggle TV.

I watched a BBC ''comedy'' about young contemporary life last night. I missed the opening and didn't catch the title but it was something about male and female flatmates. It had some okay moments but was spoiled by an incessant laughter track that only highlighted the unfunny moments and some hammy, panto like acting that dispelled any belief in the characters. It was a three snigger show at best.

Shows that work come from the gut. The guts of the producers and writers and directors who believe in a project much more deeply than demographics and marketing and focus groups. I can guarantee you that almost any well loved and iconic show you care to name in the last 10 years had to be fought for by those same people.

EDIT

Having now read the Radio Times schedules I have just figured out that the title of the ''comedy'' was Not Going Out written by Andrew Collins, film reviewer of the Radio Times and writer of that thing with the guy from The Fast Show, you know, the one where he is a grass and has to....do something.....I forget. I must buy a Radio Times.

Born In The USA

Okay hands up those who prefer watching American fare like 'Lost' or 'CSI' or 'Battlestar Gallactica' or 'The Sopranos' or 'House' or even cancelled shows like 'Arrested Development' or 'Firefly' or reruns of Frasier and Seinfeld rather than watch home grown fare?

Mmmmmmmmmmmnnn? Most of you. Interesting. That is the dolemma [pun intended] the UK networks face. Because while they are chugging out lowest common denominator user friendly pap the majority of the audience are looking at the goodies on offer on multi channel and voting with their index fingers.

In the rush to give 'Middle England ' something that a half decent share will watch [half decent by today's standards] the networks are losing sight of the fact that TV is a global business. Something the Americans learned some time ago. Big Budget production values both on and off the screen coupled with great storytelling and a cut throat sense of what works and what doesn't is why we even have people high up in the BBC saying they prefer to watch American shows [ no name no pack drill]

And yes, we see the cream not the crap and yes they make mistakes, like cancelling Arrested Development and Firefly! But take a look at say ....the BBC. Not reliant on adverstising and having squillions a year come into it's coffers and yet what's the best they can come up with for a new prime time series? A tired old police procedural format like Holby Blue. And it will chug along with it's five million viewers and some execs and writers and production folk will be in a job for a few years. Big wow.

I know, because I've written for both, that two of the mainstays of UK Drama, Casualty and The Bill sell to about half a dozen countries, max. The reason why they don't sell to more countries while the best American shows are truly global? Because they are too parochial, as in UK exec parochial. They are dull, slow and boring. You'd have to fast forward Casualty on your VCR to make it anything like E.R. The Bill is like NYPD Blue on tranquilisers. But they get solid viewing figures here. And solid viewing figures are the Holy Grail for execs. The rest of the world thinks they are crap but so long as 5 to 8 million Middle Englanders religiously tune in they will keep being made. Because the networks have given up on absolute numbers, instead relying on share to judge a show's worth . 30% share is a success. The fact that 30% of a piss poor pot is actually quite meaningless is neither here nor there to them and their salaries.

That is a little harsh. They have a mandate they have to work to, what with watersheds and diversity issues and budgets that are heavily weighted towards non creative infrastructure. But it can come as no surprise that the best current American shows have succesful movie people behind them, because sucessful movie people know that the key is 'a good story well told' Something that I think gets lost in UK TV when 'on screen on time and on budget' is the watchword of the execs rather than 'is this actually any good?'

Mad, bad, and dangerous to know.

Wouldn't we all as writers like to be known as that? Sounds like the epitomy of writers to me. Well it would if I were Byron. Heck it would be me right now if I didn't have a living to earn in this industry where mad, bad and dangerous are not the buzz words to progress a career . And make no mistake, it is an industry.

But here's a dirty little secret. People with passion are who you need to seek out in this industry. You might have to shovel coal before you get there, but someone along the line will spot that you shovel coal 10 times better than anyone else.

Just keep at it.

The Same But Different

So Holby Blue got off to a reasonable 5.4 million viewers last night. Reasonable by today's standards where it seems like around 5 million is the benchmark. And yes there is a lot more audience fragmentation than say even 10 years ago what with multi-channel, games, internet and binge drinking all available to the much coveted 16-35 age group.

Which leads me to believe it is the same 5 million people watching the networks. At least I would definitely suspect a large percentage of those 5 million are the same ones watching Holby and Casualty and The Bill , and I guess that is why another straightforward police procedural got the nod from the powers that be. Well that and the names behind it. No one at the BBC is going to get sacked commissioning a Tony Jordan project.

But here is the strange dichotomy. You go into any indy producer right now and they'll tell you they want groundbreaking original drama [don't they always] Go in with an idea like Holby Blue [which has virtually nothing to do with Holby other than the name which is really just a marketing tool to hook in those 5 million Casualty, Holby and The Bill viewers] and they'd look like you'd handed them a piss flavoured milkshake.

See, there's a huge gap between what a lot of people would like to make and what the networks are willing to make, despite a lot of protestations from them. And that is all about risk. Long running drama and recurring series are the backbone of the networks. Commercial channels live or die by their advertising revenue. Simple as that. I posted way back that ITV were touting that they were looking for the same groundbreaking fresh drama as the indies are constantly talking about. That may be true so long as it is groundbreaking fresh drama that attracts at least 5 million viewers or else you can see it moved to 11.30 on a Monday night pdq and then quietly cancelled!

The BBC, becoming ever more ratings conscious, do the same, witness The Innocence Project. In reality as far as recurring series are concerned what the networks really want is 'The Same But Different' Life On Mars gets a lot of kudos as reinventing the procedural drama, but in essence it was a bog standard police procedural set in the 70's with a neat twist. The Same But Different. Silent Witness is Quincey MD for the 21st Century. The Same But Different. Spooks is a hight tech 'The Sandbaggers'' 'The Same But Different'' The Royal is Holby forty years ago. The Same But Different. Waterloo Road is Teachers but less funny. The Same But Different. Holby Blue is The Bill. The same.......well that's it really.

I undertand the networks' position. TV is a very expensive business and a major flop can stall a career. But I can't help thinking there is an air of rabbits staring at headlights. They see a diminishing audience and don't really know what do do about it other than try to hang on to the 5 million loyal viewers. By giving them the same but different.

Script Editors

I have previously posted about ''script editors I have known'' but Dave Bishop at http://viciousimagery.blogspot.com/ in his notes of the script factory conference tickled me with his quote from Tony McHale about some script editors wanting to be writers and using your script to show how good they are.

I know Tony and I can imagine the rant and overturned tables when that happened. It recently happened to me. I was on a third draft and my notes arrived. Usually 3rd draft notes on this show are a few pages, four or five at most. Imagine my surprise when I noticed the page count said 10! Imagine my laughter when I saw that about 5 of these pages were suggested dialogue. And I mean things like add '' but'' or 'she can say ''Is that so?'' Granted, this is a baby script ed and might not know what she is doing, but the attitude is one of 'I know better' when the truth of the matter is that most script editors attempts at dialogue sucks farts from swans, honestly.

Obviously the temptation is to say ''sweetheart, if you want to be a writer then give up the monthly pay cheque and give it a go'' On the same show I know a great script editor who is now writing, so doesn't come into the 'most' category, but I wish she was back script editing. Because she did know the job, and how to get the best from the writer, which is essentially tell the writer clearly what you are looking for from a scene and let them get on with it.

There are good script editors out there and when you find them. cherish them.

Jackanory

Did you watch that when you were a kid? I think it used to be on about 4 o'clock in the afternoon, Actually I think they brought it back for a short spell quite recently. I loved it. Used to rush home from school for it. Had to wait for those fuckwits on Playschool to bugger off sometimes but that was a small price to pay. I loved any kind of storytelling. I remember Miss Harper [ all us 8 year olds had a crush on her] reading The Hobbit to us for an hour a week. Best hour of the school week, no question. And she had this really cute way of biting her lip and........

I love storytelling in whatever form. Film, TV, Book or a mate down the pub. And for me, I think that for a writer the love of story and storytelling is the best attribute you can have. All the craft in the world isn't going to help if you don't have that instinct.

Of course format is important, especially when you are trying to break in. But that is cosmetic. Telling a story well is by far more important. And that doesn't mean hitting your act 1 break on page 20 or whatever. A story has it's own rythmn, and if you've gauged it correctly no one is counting pages, they are too engrossed, anyway a good story will tend to organically follow the three act structure. Which no matter how the gurus try to analyize it, is really just beginning middle and end.

I'd like to try to cut through the bullshit about writing and just lay it on the line. We are storytellers. First last and always. Like comedians, some can do it, some can't. And it doesn't matter if you are writing corporate videos, nature documentaries, or blockbuster movies. To be a writer you need to be a storyteller in your heart and in your mind.

Then you have to get some fucker to buy it. But that's another story.

Pick noses not fights

But fight when you really have to. All you have as a writer is your integrity. That's what makes you different from the greasy pole climbers who surround the industry. Naked honesty is your tool of trade and that will eventually make you draw a line in the sand on occasion. And I mean eventually.

When is the right occasion? When it feels like it. But only after you have been through the day to day crap you have to endure as a writer. You have to be able to identify the special crap that deserves to be fought before you don the boxing gloves. I mean the Gloves of Death. The Fuck You gloves. The 'Take Your Show And Shove It Up Your Ass' gloves.

These gloves are rarely used. Almost pristine in fact. But sometimes they have to be pulled out. I'm wiping them off with a damp cloth right now.

Reality Check

I'm confused. I came into the room and my son was watching some tosh about picking Joe Public off the street to play Joe and his Amazing thingy. I swiftly left. Twenty minutes later I came back in and heard them singing songs from Grease. And I didn't recognise the same judges. Obviously this is a novel twist on reality shows. Vote for the judges? I'm assuming that was what it was because it surely couldn't have been that the two major channels had virtually identically formatted reality shows on at the same time. Could they?

Oh dear. Of course who can blame the networks as long as those phone lines keep ringing and making the programmes self financing. A bit like those £1.80 phonecalls to GMTV competitions. Does no one realise that web voting is free?

Did anyone watch the C4 programme about 2 journalists starving themselves to death? What was it Hero to Zero or something? There was definitely a zero in it somewhere. Possibly the viewing figures. As an antidote I saw C4 trail a doc about a really fat guy standing outside MacDonalds with a sign saying I'm The Burger King. So at least no bias there as far as the weight issue is concerned.

Thank goodness the next season of Strictly Come Dancing on Castaway Idol on Ice will be back soon.

Writing is like sex

A lot less fun when you're being paid for it and .......youth has the energy but age has the experience. Write what you know is a well worn adage but still true. And it stands to reason by the law of averages that an older person has ''lived'' more emotional situations that they can draw upon, even if just by dint of being longer on the planet.

You hear a lot that writing is a young persons game, and maybe that's true in some areas, ''yooof'' movies and TV maybe? But it is not a prejudice I've ever encountered. I have probably worked with upwards of 60 0r 70 writers on various shows and by far the vast majority were in their thirties and forties. In fact there were easily more at 55 than 25.

Probably the major reason for this is that it generally takes a long time to break in. So most are in their late twenties before they start to make any headway at all. I read the other day that one of the writers on the BBC Academy thingy is in her forties. And I'm not surprised. Personal experience brought to bear on a scene gives it that ring of emotional truth rather than hackneyed cliche or best guess.

So for all you oldies out there [like me] it is never too late. And remember there is always Viagara!

Get On The Bus, Jonathan

If you can get a hold of this book then buy it. It's a work of genius by Tony Mulholland. If you want to know what it's like to be a pro writer in the UK then this nails it. Essentially it is a series of ''fictitious'' emails from a writer to producers, agents, friends and lovers and it is hilarious , poingnent and absolutely true.

Ace producer friend gave it to me to read but it may be available on Amazon or www.lulu.com

I'm not a shill by the way. I really did love this.

A refreshing change

Had lunch today with a producer and heard music to my ears. Not work unfortunately, not yet anyway, but her plans blew me away. I've known her for a few years and she is sharp as a tack and very writer supportive. In fact she's marrying one soon.

So she and hubby to be have set up a prodco with a view to - and here's the kicker - giving writers the benefits of having their own prodco but without the headaches of running one! Holy fucking Jesus. That's right. A say in casting, director, editing, and - a large chunk of the back end. She's also bringing a tough motherfucker agent on board to negotiate it into any deals.

She reckons the pyramid is inverted in the current system. Creatives should be at the top and production underneath supporting them. I have appealed for her Sainthood.

Will it work? Who knows? But I admire her bollocks. So much so I'm waiving any option fee. That kind of attitude needs all the support it can get.

I'm warming you!

If I see many more news stories or drama docs or movies on Global Warming I'm going to throw up. I'm sick of them. And judging by BBC 1's lowest ever Sunday ratings so are a lot of other people.

Not really the fault of the TV and Movie makers. The current fare was probably commissioned when it was the zeitgeist. Heck politicians were racing each other [usually by air or motorcade] to proclaim their green credentials.

But now it's getting to the stage where you watch the news and everything from coffee drinking to having a crap are somehow then linked to your 'carbon footprint' God I HATE that phrase.

I feel like I did with my ex-wife ' Pardon me for fucking breathing!'

Anyway, from now on, anything looking remotely like a green related programme will get no eye space chez ED. Not very PC admittedly. But PC is anathema to writers who want to challenge rather than report. Big up for Rowan Joffe for his upcoming Paedophile drama told from the point of view of the paedophile and to C4 for commissioning it. Don't know if it's good or not but I admire the bollocks.

Writers write

You know it is true. It is something inside you that forces it's way past domestic problems and professional problems and heck even the geo-political problems that you face in your daily life.

You have to write.

And that is your starting point. Then you have to learn the art. The bad news is that you will never stop learning the art. The good news is that you will never stop learning the art.

By the art, I simply mean what works. What blends together in character and story and pace and tone and action and dialogue to give that magical mixture that really comes alive on screen and holds an audience spellbound. Okay maybe not so simple. And nothing that can be worked out with a formula despite the contentions of the gurus.

Book learning is fine up to a certain point. It's how I started. It gives you the basics and that is a good thing. It means you have made the effort to present a script in a professional manner. But unless you have that inner drive to write no matter what, book learning is like the guy who studied Medicine because he thought doctors scored with hot nurses.

If it's not in you when you write , it won't be on the page when it's read.

It's who you know.

Isn't it? I've worked on shows where a friend of a friend of the producer got a writing gig when there was a stack of great specs sitting on the desk. Wankers.

But here's the dirty little secret. if you want a career, it isn't who you know, it is what you write. Because all the 'important' people you know will come about because they love what you write. If you can't write worth a damn then you are soon found out. I worked on a show where the new exec producer brought her sister on as a writer. Handed her the Christmas ep as her first commission. It was a train wreck of a script. I know because I had to re-write it . Exec producer was sacked by that time. Who you know might get you an in. Staying in requires a lot more.

Networking is one of the most important aspects of this industry, but you can never forget that you have to back that up with product. If you are related to, sleeping with or have incriminating photos of producers then that might get you one shot. But to have an actual Gods honest career you have to build up contacts who know and trust you. That means showing them you have talent. And you can't fake that. No producer is going to hire you just because you are a nice guy. It helps. But if you don't perform you are out like K-fed or that C4 womens Sumo wrestling programme. What happened to that by the way? Anybody?

The Neverending Story

Thought I would post a little about what it's like writing for episodic TV. I'd been told to expect notes on a draft all week. Today I was supposed to be having lunch with gorgeous blonde. Hopefully followed by rampant rumpy. But I got notes late last night with a deadline for 3 o'clock today.

The notes weren't good. They showed a complete lack of understanding of pace, tone and character motivation. Given the time constraints I blew off gorgeous blonde to get the script done, and handed in the best job I could out of the piece of crap I had been handed.

Half an hour later I get a call saying an entire story strand is being inserted over 12 eps. Two of which I have written and one of which is the one I've just delivered at 3 o'clock. Kinda makes you wonder why there was such a big rush to turn in that draft overnight?

Kinda makes me pissed off I blew gorgeous blonde off to do it.

But that is the nature of the beast. The schedule rules. A mate of mine and I worked out today that on a particular show we both write on there is about six weeks between commission and the script going into production. Fuck knows what production do for the next 3 months. But out of that six weeks the writers have about ten to twelve days of actual writing. The rest is waiting for notes.

And here's why. Very few people in this business understand writing. They understand timetables and schedules and deadlines and have career ladders to climb. That's a difficult thing to do when you have no discernable creative talent. But that it what you as a writer have to deal with. And I mean that seriously. I pray for the time when non arsey writers get together in a writers room and create magic. The BBC should be doing it now. ITV should have been doing it years ago.

What's the big idea?

Not a bad day on the golf course. And as expected an idea popped into my head. Okay granted it had no relevence whatsoever to the brief I was supposed to be thinking about, but what the heck, I'll take it.

Because for me, good ideas are the hardest part of writing. I mean good ideas as opposed to the brain farts I get quite regularly that get me all excited for a few hours until the fatal flaw in the concept finally hits me. Because good ideas are about as rare as a bacon roll in Baghdad. And any writer who tells you they are constantly coming up with great ideas is either a liar or deluded.

Now comes the other hard part, translating that basic idea into a workable and fresh story, and even more importantly, one that I passionately want to write. I might get a couple of days or weeks in and then decide that passion isn't there. In which case I'll stop and move on to something else. It's a one night stand rather than marriage material. No passion going in means no passion on the page. And at the risk of setting off a semantic argument, to me, that passion translates into that elusive ''voice''.

And that voice can be the difference between that script moving up the chain and getting you attention and sales, or being an also ran. Think about the last time you saw something that was truly original, a one off mind blowing script concept. Pretty hard. Being John Malkovitch maybe?

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang was essentially just a who dunnit. But the voice was clearly Shane Black and there were some neat touches. But wildly original? Not really. And if it was wildly original would have had difficulty in getting made. The mainstream film game, and TV to a large extent requires ''the same'' but ''different''. They don't want to scare an audience off with something they just don't get. There is way too much money involved.

Look at the latest big ITV commission. 50 eps of The Royal Today. Which is a spin off of The Royal, which is a spin off of Heartbeat. Not a whole heck of originality there. Holby Blue will be hitting the screens shortly which is a spin off from Holby which is a spin off from Casualty. Torchwood and Sara Jane are spin offs from Doctor Who. City Lights is a spin off from Northern Lights. The Green Green Grass is a spin off from ....... Christ, anytime now I expect to see The Adventures of Friar Tuck being bandied about as a possible series. Or how about Last of the Summer Wine - The Early Years? [Dammit I shouldn't have said that - get ready for Compo and Clegg with 50's quiffs and brothel creepers, perfect Sunday night viewing] And don't get me started on movie sequels and prequels.For a lot of execs familiarity breeds content.

So a good idea doesn't necessarily have to be something we have never seen anything like before, though kudos if you manage it. A buddy cop movie is always a buddy cop movie. But with originality in the actual writing and characterisation and a good dose of passion your script has a much greater chance of success.

Spike

I've noticed a significant increase in traffic on this blog today. I don't recall talking about free sex, teenagers go wild or big n' bouncy so I'm presuming I've been linked to a much more popular site rather than it being random searches.

If so, my thanks and I hope that any new readers get something from it. And feel free to ask any questions.

Life without the boring bits

.........Is one of the best descriptions I've heard about soap. And say what you like, Corrie got a 50.2 share last night for the trial of Tracy Barlow.

A lot of writers turn their nose up at soap - or serial drama as the execs prefer to call it, soap paradoxically becoming a dirty word.

But the figures speak for themselves and while they do, any writer who slanders soap in front of a network exec is not likely to get a Christmas card.

And here's the truth - soap is damned hard to write! Think about it, it eats up story like like a machine. You have maybe thirty characters you have to know inside out, each one some viewers favourite, the time pressures are enormous, stories can change several times through the drafts, and the level of interference/collaboration by others is a constant challenge.

The best soaps pull it all together really well. Production needs versus creativity and the right balance of plot, story, humour and drama. And that's why they can get a 50.2 share. And it's damned hard work.

Without wishing to offend anyone's tastes I think Corrie is probably the most loved of the UK soaps because they most often get that balance right. And I think that is largely because the writing team on Corrie have a large degree of influence. For example I flicked over to an ep of EastEnders the other night. Five seconds in a teenage girl came out with a line that was so jarringly incongruous that I flicked away again. I don't actually believe a writer wrote that line. I think it had to be a script ed or producer. And from what I hear about the power of the writing team I don't think that would happen on Corrie.

And that is one of the main reasons why soap writing is hard. The characters are well known and have been loved/hated by the viewers sometimes over many years. One slip in characterisation and the viewer is scratching their head. They don't care if it was an overnight re-write because a story strand disappeared due to an actor being arrested for kiddie fiddling. You screwed up and ruined their night's viewing. Soap requires a combination of fleetness of foot and deftness of touch from everyone involved. Not an easy thing to do when you are on 4 or 5 nights a week.

And who are some of the biggest hitters on UK TV right now? Paul Abbot, Tony Jordan, Jimmy McGovern, Ashley Pharoh. All ex soap writers. It's not everyone's cup of tea but it's one heck of a training ground and introduction to the realities of TV.

The Brief

So I've just been sent a brief for a series of single dramas. Basically briefs can be very prescriptive or very open in that stories have to be either be tailored to a specific theme or about whatever you want. Both have their problems.

A very prescriptive brief might be a turn off straight away because you have no affinity with the subject matter. A very open brief can leave you floundering as to tone and content.
This one is very open. It basically requires ''big ideas and themes'' - but looking at the budget, not all that big! I kid - big ideas and themes are not necessarily expensive - but it means my ''Moby Dick in Space'' is probably a non starter.

So I'm going to play golf. A lot of people will say that writing is more perspiration than inspiration. And that is true while you are in script. But while I'm trying to create something new I find time away from the computer much more productive than sitting staring at a blank screen. In fact some of my best ideas have come when I'm in the shower. Don't know why, it just happens that way.

I have a few days free so I'm just going to be idle and let the ideas come when they want to. [I should mention that none of my existing ideas quite fit this brief, otherwise they'd be going in pronto]

This way doesn't work for everyone, but it's what I've always done and don't feel the need to change. Actually I've done it once, for a police procedural set in Manchester. It was a rush job and I didn't have the luxury of time. So I sat down with pen and paper and forced out a story that involved Manchester's gay villiage. I thought it was pretty good, lots of twists and red herrings and sent it off thinking it was a shoe in. I was told it was too gay! Don't suppose they could really have put that in the brief!

Breaking in and staying in

There's been a lot of interesting chatter here recently, my thanks to those who participated. Here's the skinny on what it take to be a pro writer after you get your first gig.
You will work with people who neither understand drama or realise what it takes to write good drama. You will also work with people who do. They will be in the minority. But in order to continue working you have to satisfy both parties.

I'm working on a show right now where I have a baby script ed who has had no training and a producer who thinks tears and snotters = drama. So what do I do? Well, I argue the points to just before I lose my temper, always the best place to stop, and then when I'm faced with ''if you don't cut that scene we will''
Well, no I didn't. They can cut it but I won't. I've been in this game long enough to know what works and what doesn't. I know enough to know I'm dealing with people who don't really understand what they are doing.
And that is a major part of being a pro writer. Know which battles to pick. I will lose this battle. This draft. But I made my feelings known. I'll write the draft they want and it will be shit. Third draft they will realise it is shit. And I'll write a good 3rd draft. Annoying but par for the course.

You always have to remember that the way things are set up in the UK, producers and script eds can have no idea what the writing process is about. Unlike the writer rooms in other tv cultures for most producers here writing is another country.

Don't give up the day job

In response to Jaded's questions in previous post.

Under no circumstances would I advise anyone to give up a job to try to start a career in screenwriting. Unless perhaps you get on the new BBC Writer's Academy where at least you are guaranteed a year of work.

Building a career does take years in the vast majority of cases. So write in your spare time and don't even consider giving up your job until you see a steady stream of commissions coming in. Even then think hard about it. You will have no regular pay cheque and no job security. It isn't for everyone.

A career involves making contacts, proving you can do the job and a large slice of luck. Mainly being in the right place at the right time with the right script. It takes talent and pereseverence and business sense. And while you are starting out the commissions will be thin on the ground. TV is a specialised and expensive business and many Producers are loathe to use brand new writers on their shows because mistakes can cost many thousands of pounds as well as screw up the shooting schedule.

No one can actually say 'I'm going to be a pro writer' It's not like being an accountant where you pass a few exams and off you go. Talent does play a large part but there are many other factors. There are lots of talented writers out there who don't have careers. There are simply no guarantees.

You can shorten the odds a little if you snag a good agent, and I think that's the way to go if you can. But remember, lots of people think they can write. I could give a long list of editors, directors and even an exec producer who decided writing was easy peasy and that would be their new career. With one exception they have returned to their own jobs and the sanctuary of the monthly pay cheque. It is TOUGH out there. And that is what you have to be prepared for. Make sure you have the talent for it. Then dip your toe in the water to see if you have the skills needed and the personality for it. Then and only then, have a think about whether you want to try to make a career out of it.

Would I do it again knowing what I know now? Probably, I'm fit for nothing else.

Hurry up and wait

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that the time taken for prodco's to get back to you after submitting seems to be getting longer and longer? I realised last week that I'd had a meeting with a major prodco in December and at their request sent them two- sheets on three projects. Hadn't heard a dicky! E-mailed them a polite reminder and never even got that acknowledged?????

So I had a word with my agent to see what else I had out there and how long it had been out. It would appear that it's taking at least two months to get a response from anyone! And that is quick compared to some of them. Okay I have my little circle of producers who know me quite well and get back quickly but the rest? Sheeeesh!

Actually, having thought about it I was invited to submit some sample scenes of a show way back at the end of January. This with a view to a writing gig on the show. I was told it was a rush job and could I get it done over the weekend. I duly did. Guess what? About a week ago my agent queried. They haven't read all the samples yet. So much for the rush job. So what they have is a sample written over a weekend rather than a week. Could have made all the difference.

Should this gig work out it will be quite a commitment. By the time they finally decide, will I still be available? I hope not. Because the complete lack of information and disregarding of the working writers' need to schedule doesn't exactly fill me with optimism that these will be swell people to work for.

Then again on a show I'm writing for now I've just waited nearly 3 weeks for 1st draft notes. Three times as long as it took me to write the fucking thing. No doubt I'll get them just in time to ruin my weekend - again. Okay maybe I'm a grumpy old man, but at my time of life I don't have time to hurry up and wait.

So, in future Mr Producer if you don't get back to me in six weeks maximum you are off my Christmas Card list. Tinkerty Tonk! And I mean that to sting.

The Salesman

I met an old Uni pal last week, just before a lurgie struck me down. He was in town for a couple of days from Chigago. Also present was another old friend of his who he invited along. Nice guy, really liked him. About six pints of Stella in, I realised why Al had thought it would be a good idea to get us all together. Aren't Americans just great at networking? See, his other friend was a wannabe writer! Joy of joys an evening vomiting up information like a drunken penguin to a bulimic chick. Does life get any sweeter?

If I was told before hand I was expected to give sage like advice I would definitely not have gone on to shorts! But to be honest even if I was capable, no sage like advice was needed. Because it was the same old littany. '' Everyone says I write great stuff, but whenever I try to get it to producers I get a straight knock back or never hear from them again''

So I asked a couple of pertinent questions. Who ish everyone? and Gimmee a shample ov yer pitch to produshers? Remember I'd had a few beverages by this time.

Okay, everyone was a few mates and some dubious guy who had written an episode of Doctors and charged him £50 for the privallege of reading a script and telling him how good he was. But had any real industry pros ever read any of his work? By real I mean those at the sharp end, the ones making real decisions. No they hadn't. Because what he failed to realise is that there are two hugely different but very much connected sides to being a writer. Writing and selling.

By selling I don't mean the magical mega buck deal. I mean selling the read. Because make no mistake, as a new writer, selling the read is hard! I asked him how he went about it. he looked a little flummoxed. ''Well, I tell them I'm a marketing manager with Blob, I've been writing for 5 years and this is my 8th script. My ambition is to become a pro writer and...........'''

Whoa, whoa, whoa, .................I'm already half asleep and this is a mate of a mate. And a frickin' marketing manager! Physician, heal thyself!

If I told this guy how many scripts and queries producers wade through in a week he'd crap his pants! They would probably not get past that first sentence. BORING. Who cares who you are, what you do or what your ambition is? What is the frickon story!!!!!!!! First last and always.

If your querie isn't sharp, erudite and grabbing, then the probability is the script you are pitching is probably in the same vein. No need to read further.

Let your log line do the talking. Just make sure it's a damn good one. Like a good scene, your querie comes in as late as possible and out as early as possible. Don't clog it up with fluff. You are battling against hundreds of others, most of them just circling the drain before they give up, but the few who get a read at least have a chance. You need to be in that few.

It's a buyers market, make sure you are a good salesman.

Those who can, do

Those who can't........well they just can't. You know the one thing that REALLY ticks me off about writing scripts. It's not the fact that any episode I write might possibly be savaged by an editor wearing boxing gloves, or a director just going through the motions, or a producer giving crazed notes I have to try to incorporate.

Nope, none of the above. Those are just run of the mill occupational hazzards.

What brings the red mist down, especially as by that stage there is nothing I can do to remedy it, is when someone - script editor, director, whomever, decides that they'll add a couple of lines of dialogue here and there and that dialogue sucks farts from swans.

See, in the main, the audience in general doesn't really notice lazy direction or editing, but they definitely do notice teeth grating dialogue, and just a couple of lines of nail down a blackboard stuff can do a heck of a lot of harm, especially if the actors deliver it like Pinnochio on mogadon. It instantly takes them out of story. Pretty much the last thing you want to happen.

I don't have a standard PACT contract handy, but from memory it pretty much says that the writer has first dibs on any substantial revision to the script subject to any time constraints.

Two get-out clauses right there. Try arguing that a couple of lines of dialogue is substantial? You'll get blank stares. An entire strand? Sorry, time constraints.

The thing is some people can write good dialogue. That's one of the reasons why they're pro writers. It's actually one of the minor reasons, but still a whole hell of a lot more important than some Klutz with a tin ear sticking their two cents in.

But they have THE POWER to do that. And it's something you've pretty much got to live with. I'd say that if something I write ends up on screen as something like 70% of the way I wrote and envisaged it then I'm happy. So long as the none of the other 30% did actual harm. But it takes so little to do actual harm, and that is something a lot of non writers in the industry who are concentrating on line production aren't aware of.

Tagged

Potdoll has tagged me. I'm computer illiterate and don't really know what that means but I gather I'm to tell 5 things not many people know about me. Oh well why the heck not.

1. I spent a night in a jail cell in Nigeria for insulting the State.

2. I have a degree in accountancy

3. I killed a sheep on a golf course when my drive smacked it right between the eyes.

4. I once played naked football in Amsterdam

5. A couple I met in a bar in Providence R.I invited me back to their place for what turned out to be a swingers party. I ate, drank and left, as opposed to eats, shoots and leaves.

What happens now? Do I tag someone and if so how? Told you I was dumb.

Flexibility

In the course of a writing career you come across many different kinds of producers and script editors. Some good, some not so good. But when you're struggling up the ranks the best piece of advice I can give is shut up and keep your head down. Yes there are writers who simply won't work with script editors or tell them to shove their notes where the sun don't shine. But they are craggy wizened veterans who have been at the top of the tree for some time.

When you are trying to forge a career, you have to take it on the chin. Adapt to the different personalities you have to deal with and find the best way of getting your way without antagonizong anyone. Remember that when you have made it you can spit in their eye if necessary, but until then, cool your jets. Unless you've explored every avenue and it still transpires the guy's a moron.

I've worked with good and bad. That's a very loose definition, because good can either mean someone who pretty much leaves you alone to get on with it or someone who gives great constructive notes that really help the script. Bad can mean someone who keeps you in the dark or gives notes that aren't worth the paper they've been wiped on.

I wrote a few episodes of a very popular medical show set in a hospital. Not much of a clue there! I mean this was prime time drama, so you'd think the people there would be shit hot yes? Most of them were. But if you get the one that isn't then God help you.

I was new to the show and didn't want to make any waves, but this guy I secretly christened Mr Good Luck. Every time he phoned he would say something like ''the producer wants more energy in the mid section, I'm not sure what he means and I'm not sure how you'll do it but good luck.''

Nice guy but as a script editor about as much use as the Pope's bollocks. I said nothing and tried to do the best job I could. That meant phoning the producer on a Saturday to try and get some sense for a Monday deadline. Producer wasn't pleased. I didn't write another episode.

I later found out that a craggy wizened writer had the same script editor. She told them ''either I get a new script editor or I walk''

So.......should I have said something? It's a tormenting question. I was very new to the show, and you've always got to remember that people move on. As a new writer on the show causing a fuss, that ''reputation'' can quickly spread.

On balance I'd say it's best just to suck it up. Getting canned is an occupational hazzard that can happen for a number of reasons, but what is perceived as a bad attitude can stall a career before you get the chance to stick it back to them.

Starting out it's like a young David Beckham polishing Gary Neville's boots. Thank you sir, can I have another!

More LA Stories

Going away for a few days - and yes it is work, nothing to do with gorgeous blonde. Unfortunately.

In an earler LA post I mentioned Steve, a customer at the car wash. He owned a ''no credit card required'' car rental business and a lot of his customers were porn stars, many of whom didn't have bank accounts for various reasons. He vastly overcharged them on the basis that he had to steam clean the seats when the cars were returned. I didn't ask why.

LA is a place where you can bump into anyone. I saw Mel Gibson buying bagels on 3rd street. So there you go, that puts paid to all that anti semetic stuff. Just before I left for the states I had seen a documentary with he and Clive James and he seemed like an okay guy. He told a story about how crazy the business was. He had been on a chat show promoting some movie, and as he walked off someone from the studio audience rushed at him with a script in hand shouting it was perfect for him. Audience member was quickly bundled out by security.

Anyway, back to Steve. To put it mildly, it is odd to see a white guy working in a car wash in LA, and as it was the one Steve used for his fleet we struck up an acquaintance. Who was I? What was I doing here, etc. When he found out I was a writer and had read for some big companies he asked me to take a look at his friend's script. I still remember the title . The Rocking Horse Soldier, which I think is not a bad title.

I looked at it and it was ...........meh to be truthful, not that great. No real voice, dull story. In reader speak ''dramatic situations not exploited to their full potential''

I gave him my notes, couched as diplomatically as possible and he said he'd pass them on. But then what he said really tickled me. ''We wanted Mel Gibson for the lead. Almost got the script to him at a chat show he was on but those security fucktards got in our way''

And that's LA.

The Spec

Sorry, it's been a while - work and stuff. Who am I kidding? Actually it's because I'm infatuated with a beautiful blonde who fucks like a porn star. Fortunately I gave her my real name so she won't be reading this.

Anyhooo enough of my problems! The most important thing in your original spec is VOICE. No one knows what it is, but everyone knows it when they see it. Don't copy styles. No matter how much you like Black or Tarrentino you are not them. You are you.

Good Eds and producers are attracted to confident voices. That equates to writers who know what they're doing, do it well and don't give a crap about marketing. Then comes the meeting. At that stage they will decide if you are worth a punt to write on a show. And that is where you have to make your decision. Are you a writer who can assimulate a show? Think about it carefully because if you are an unproduced writer the chances of your spec being produced are slim to nil. That's just the way it is.

Assimulating a show means altering your voice to match that of the show. Some can, some can't. If you can't that doesn't mean you're not a good writer. Osmosis is a particular skill. But to be a pro writer osmosis is a skill worth having.

The Writing Viewer

Twice in the last couple of days I've been chatting with my agents and they brought up three
new shows that are just airing. Had I seen them? What did I think etc. [They hadn't seen them] I was able to say yes to all three and give an opinion.

Wow, where do you find the time to watch so much TV? They almost asked. Well the truth is I don't. I very rarely watch a whole episode of something. If I want a general view of style, pace and tone - 15 minutes, tops.

That's when I'm watching as a writer. And that is my job. It's my job to know what nearly every show on TV is about stylistically, I don't need to know the plot or outcome of an individual episode.

I watch differently as a viewer, strictly for pleasure. That changes of course if you have a sniff of writing for that show. Then you become an avid viewer, more avid that the geekiest fanboy imaginable. You listen for the WAY that characters say things, not just what they say. You look for act breaks, how many stories per ep [A B C and D] Memorise snippets of back story. Do they use wipes, fades, jump-cuts? Study the characters motivations for clues as to how they might react in a given situation. In other words, be ahead of the game.

So, with the possible exception of soap, you don't have to get square eyed watching TV until that assignment is in the air. Up til then all you need to know is ''enough'' What do you think God invented box set DVDs for? And think of the time you're saving to actually write?

How To Give 'Good Meeting'

Clean? Check.
Sober? Check
Pitch perfect? Check
Up to speed on the previous work of the producer/exec? Check.

The rest is down to you not saying anything stupid. Clean is very important. No one wants to work with a stinky writer.

Of course it helps if you have some amusing anecdotes, because if this is a first meeting the inevitable question will be ''Why did you get into writing?'' I've already overused ' I wanted a step up from playing piano in a Brothel.' so that one's out, but you get the idea.

''Dunno really'', or ''I've just always liked writing'' may be true but are hardly memorable. And that's what you have to do in whatever short space of time has been granted to you. Be memorable for all the right reasons. Talent is a gimmee. You wouldn't be having the meeting in the first place if you didn't have talent. Don't rely on talent.

Because you could well be the third or fourth 'talented' writer they've seen that day. And if you're up for a gig or pushing your own project then you better believe it that those writers before you were working their asses off to make a good impression. Because that impression can be the difference between YES and NO.

So

Personable? Check
Enthusiastic? Check
Amusing? Check