…but it turns out that I don’t care.
Rio, by Duran Duran.
Exactly. I’ve seen several episodes of TV shows when the X-rays hanging on the light boxes in the background are upside down and backwards. But only someone in my field (or a doctor) would notice.
I’m just sayin’…if Dio’s patient comes down with pseudolupus thanatopsis mimmicus, and House cures it with electroshock therapy and bleach, we can’t bitch.
As long as it’s plausible.
Note on the choice of House: Procedurals are actually quite formulaic, so House was a good pick. It’s a medical drama, so it has its issues, but it won’t require that much research, really. It’s easier than writing for a forensics procedural (even one with semi-bad-science like one of the CSIs) with lots of technobabble.
In semi-answer to a previous question: my work has mostly been in crime procedurals because of my academic background. If there’s Semtex involved, or psychosis, obscure neurological dysfunction, Albanians, semi-automatic firearms, ritualistic overtones to a killing, serial anythings and really warped ways to die, I may have had a hand in the doctoring, polishing, or editing of that script (and the exposition dialog therein contained).
Best of luck to Dio in his challenge. The goalposts have been moved, the challenge has completely changed since it was issued, so I’m stepping away from it. The point of the exercise is no longer what it was supposed to be. If it’s basically a NaNoWriMo thing, now, then yay team, best of luck to him in completing the project and best of fun to you all who review it and say thumbs up.
So the challenge has been changed, and Dio has decided he didn’t care about the challenge as it was issued. Whatcha gonna do. Basically, he has told writers that a) we suck, b) he could do a better job that we can and c) that he is clever enough to do it. We told him what it would take for him to do it, and he has since backed down from the challenge. He has given us all the excuses in the world as to why he can’t actually accomplish the job under the circumstances. We made some concessions. Then a bunch of Dopers came to his defense saying that it’s unreasonable to expect him to live up to the same expectations…
So what’s it gonna be? Either he truly CAN do what he says he can do – which is write a professional grade screen play, since screenwriters suck and are a dime a dozen… or he can’t. If he’s going to make this truly realistic, then let us (the few SDMB screenwriters) be the judge of whether or not the work, under TECHNICAL GUIDELINES, would make the cut.
CAN it fit in a 42-44 minute slot?
CAN it fit into commercial-friendly acts?
DOES it follow basic story structure for television?
DOES it follow a procedural template?
DOES it remain true to the show’s characters?
DOES it flow correctly, or is the dialog stilted?
ARE there any glaring newbie mistakes – network non-friendly things that would need to be taken out right away? Things you CANNOT show, or CANNOT do, or CANNOT SAY on broadcast?
… and so on. Whether or not Dio’s teleplay could pass muster in the end will be a good question. Only those of us who actually have done this before will be able to give you an idea about that. If you want our opinion, and it seems like the consensus is that our opinion is not wanted, I’m sure we’d be glad to provide it. Believe me when I say that we’re actually not evil and not in this to see Dio fail. In fact, if we were asked for a hand, we’d be glad to throw pointers at the guy.
Pretty much all of this is lies. I never said that writers all suck. I never said I could do “better” than anything except the absolute dreck like “Til death,” and the only “challenge” which ever existed was my own statement that I could finish a passable script in two weeks. I have never promised anything more or less than that, your own attempts to move the goal posts notwithstanding. I have not backed off what I said I could do one inch, nor have I made a single “excuse.”
I certainly don’t think that the consensus is that your opinion is unwanted. Maybe I didn’t read too closely but I’m not even sure where you got that impression. While I’m sure a few looky-loos will judge purely on how many good “zingers” there are, I’m also sure specific criticisms about the functionality of the script (as per your list) will be appreciated.
And Diogenes, you should have chosen CSI:Miami. You save at least 2 minutes of dialog time with all the dramatic sunglasses removals/barely appropriate, yet still mangled, clichés. Plus, for a Christmas special everyone has to get killed with a pine tree or mistletoe extract poisoning, so that’s half the plot written right there.
Oh, Lord. All anybody starts with is a draft, so I think that’s all that’s reasonable to expect of Dio at this point.
Well, let’s be fair here. That’s kind of weasel-like of you. What you said was:
Ok, so you’re not saying “all crap”, but you did say most television writing was appalling and that you could piss better script in the snow than in the average Til Death episode. Nice.
Nice TRY buddy. I quote (bolding mine):
That last one had us laughing, considering that the original thread was about the strike and residuals…
Nothing you quoted from me supports any of your claims. I reiterate that the only challenge which has ever existed was my claim that I could write a passable script in two weeks. You kept trying to add bullshit conditions which I have no interest in and never agreed to.
By the way, do you deny that most scripted television is crap? If you’re actually going to deny that then you have no credibility and we have nothing to talk about.
It’s not like the technical specs are how a show is judged by viewers. “Did ya see Heroes last night?” “Yeah, the story is a mess and it’s boring for me, but the technical specs are outstanding. Did you see how they cut for a commerical at precisely 8:20 PM? Brilliant!”
Knock yourselves out. Seriously.
But working within the limitations of the medium is one of the things that makes the task harder. You need to hit dramatic beats at the commercial breaks or the cut will be jarring.
You said “professional quality” script, not “passable” script.
And, cricetus, of course the viewers don’t judge a show based on the technical specs of the script, but if the script doesn’t meet those technical specs, it’s a useless piece of garbage that can’t be filmed, no matter how awesome the plot and characterization are.
This whole thing is ridiculous anyway, if you ask me (and I know you didn’t). There are always going to be whiners claiming that works of art in any medium are simple to produce and can be done by the average Joe with enough time on his hands. These people are informally known as “idiots” and should be summarily ignored.
Do people who write TV scripts have other jobs? Or do they write 40 hours per week? How many hours per day do you expect Diogenes to devote to this bullshit? I mean, honestly, maybe he overstated himself, but to expect him to do this, with zero experience, in two weeks, with a full-time job, seems a bit… unfair.
Honestly, is this even that controversial a statement? Are you actually defending the quality of Til Death? I’m sure he could piss a better script in the snow than that show. I don’t know that most TV writing is appalling, but I will say this-- most sitcom writing is appalling. I wonder why Diogenes didn’t decide to write a sitcom, because there is room for improvement in that genre.
Seems like House is a bad choice for several reasons: it’s supposed to be funny, unlike your straight hospital drama, so you’re not avoiding writing comedy, but do have to write black comedy, which I think is harder. It does have to have some technical accuracy, despite claims here to the contrary. It’s an hour long, thus requiring a script twice as long as your average sitcom. And it’s one of the better written shows on TV, thus setting a pretty high bar.
Diogenes, why not try to write a half hour sitcom? I know you probably don’t want to change that aspect of the challenge now, but it seems much more in line with your claims about TV writing sucking, and would be a more attainable goal.
Some of what she said in that list matters to viewers, eg true to characters, flows correctly. And it sure looks like Dio said “professional quality script once I familarized myself with the technicalities”, but he might think that “technicalities” only relates to font and page layout. I hope not (see last paragraph).
I still think this will be a fun exercise if everyone goes through with the writing and the technical and non-technical criticism. Dio can look up the basics and we can see how a fairly intelligent guy does on his first shot, even if not how he’d grind it out as a career.
To be honest, I’m sure the actual job can suck when you are expected to write in anti-drug or pro-green themes to placate some corporate types but I’m still betting on Dio to bang out something decent and not far off on the technical requirements.
Are they always wrong, these “whiners”?
Yup. Simple economics. If something looks easy, but people still get paid decently to do it, it’s not as simple as it looks.
Say that a lot of T.V. writing really is crap. What’s the more likely explanation?
-
Even though tens of millions of dollars are riding on the success or failure of every television series, the people running the studios are too stupid to perform a simple task that any intelligent amateur can perform easily.
-
Writing snappy dialog and compelling stories is hard even for professionals and doing it under the time and technical constraints of television production makes it even harder.
Unless the medium is “crap you can quickly throw together with no training whatsoever”, then yes, pretty much always wrong. I am highly skeptical of "anyone could do _____ " claims, primarily because I have the benefit of experience that has taught me that there are a lot of jobs, skills, and tasks that are seemingly easy but actually require quite a bit of experience, training, or prior knowledge to be able to complete successfully.
And just to be totally clear, I’ll say up-front that 1) I agree that a lot of TV screenwriting is bad, 2) I think there are probably people out there that don’t write screenplays but could do so quite successfully if they put their hand to it, but 3) it does not therefore follow that good screenwriters are a “dime a dozen” or that anyone can write a screenplay if they feel like it. Which just goes back to my original point that this whole exercise with Diogenes is silly and proves nothing.
They are ALWAYS wrong, eh? No one ever went from being an amateur script writer to a professional? That claims seems as arrogant as the behavior you’re protesting, and as patently false. Surely it is possible. It has happened. Is it likely? No, but it’s possible. If you won’t even admit that, then Diogenes has no chance of ever creating something you’d give a chance.
All this is quibbling, really. There is no consensus on what standards have been set for Diogenes. Peope are already getting pissy over the expectations. How can he possible produce a script now that is going to be acceptable to his critics and legitimately possible for him to create, in a time frame that is considered reasonable by all?
This is really starting to look like a contract negotiation. I hope the irony is not lost on everyone.
Of course. It happens all the time. But that’s not the same as “it can be done by an average Joe with enough time on his hands”. Becoming a professional writer takes both talent and practice.
Suppose **Diogenes ** had said something like: “I went down to my local furniture store and everything they had on display was crap! I’m an intelligent chap and good with my hands. I wager I can knock together a chest of drawers in a couple of weeks that’s as good as anything they’re selling in that clip joint! True, I’ve never built a piece of furniture before, but I spent a summer shingling houses when I was young. How much harder can it be?”
Would you say that he has a reasonable chance of producing a decent chest of drawers? Or is it more likely that being unfamiliar with the task at hand he may not be aware of all the challenges that he will face?