First, I probably have the creative aptitude of a binder clip, maybe a toaster if I’m going to be generous. So it’s not like I think I’d ever have a shot at doing something like this. In the words of Saint (Dirty) Harry, ‘A man’s gotta know his limitations.’ But it’s nice to dream.
So from time to time I’ve looked into the mechanics. The different associations, conventions, who you have to try to network with, even pointers on content. A lot of it is formulaic. If you’re really motivated and put the time, eventually you’ll get someone to listen to you.
But what makes something a GOOD concept not only creatively such that people will be engaged, seduced and joy of joys, even addicted, but is constructed so that even from a lifeless, stack of typed pages and maybe a story board presentation, anyone with half a brain can see the potential?
I’m not sure there’s an answer personally because whenever I think about this, I realize that a lot of the shows that I love, it’s because of the actors. OK, the characters. But how much is the original concept for character and how much is the actor’s nuanced execution is hard to say - for me at least.
Also, with market fragmentation, television has actually been getting better. Mad Men never would have made it as a prime time broadcast show, partly because it’s edgier but also because it just appeals to a narrower audience. So maybe 5 or 10 years ago there would have been a few basic formulae you needed follow depending on the genre you were shooting for - that’s just not true any more.
So is this even worth talking about? Are there some broad parameters that are objectively essential or is the whole thing pretty much a crap shoot?
The most overlooked thing about a brilliant idea is the ability to execute it. Networks get scores of show ideas every year. Many are viable, a few are even good. But it’s a lot easier for them to take a chance on a project that has a team (producers, writers, etc.) with a proven record behind it.
IIRC, Phillip Rosenthal has said that, despite having David Letterman and Ray Romano behind the project, he had a lot of trouble convincing CBS to agree to Everybody Loves Raymond because the network didn’t trust Rosenthal to be the “show runner,” and wanted a more experienced producer.
Yeah, that’s reinforcing my ‘crap shoot’ bias in the sense that the concept and initial dynamics are probably irrelevant for the long term. It’s the writers, designers and others with creative input who will determine success. Which now that I say it I guess should have been obvious and is certainly how the gatekeepers who screen all the wannabees look at it.
It’s probably like the difference between Jimmy Page playing a piece of shit electric guitar you got at a garage sale and the neighbor’s kid wailing on a vintage Fender.
There have been a million previous threads about this and I can sum them all up in a paragraph.
The way to sell a TV series is to move to Los Angeles, get any job you possibly can in the business, write constantly on the side, network like crazy, and work yourself up the ladder. If you’re one of the people who succeed you’re already out in Los Angeles doing exactly this and not asking questions about it, so the chances of your succeeding are exactly zero. It is not a crap shoot; it is a business plan.
Something like this can happen, but almost never does. Keep in mind these guys didn’t really come out of nowhere. They’d been on the Hollywood scene for years as actors in small parts before they broke through.
So, if you’ve got talent that power players can recognize, and you’ve got good connections, it might pay to shoot your pilot yourself. Gotta know what you’re doing, though, and if you don’t know anyone who can make the right introductions, your DVD will end up in the dumpster.
Normally, networks only buy pilot scripts from experienced writers, with years of success as either staff writers on existing TV shows, or years of success writing for feature films.
There are exceptions. If your work has already made a big splash in some other medium - standup comedy, comic books, newspaper comic strips, feature articles in magazines, the theater, best selling non-fiction, young adult fiction, - you may be able to sell it to Hollywood for them to develop. Without solid proof of audience appeal, however, nobody’s interested in buying ideas alone.
Now, from a Hollywood perspective, most people who think they have a great idea for a movie or TV show, don’t actually have an idea for show at all. What they have is an idea for an idea for a show.
That’s because the only thing that really counts as an idea for a show is a finished script. Properly formatted, appropriate page count, brainstormed, outlined, written, critiqued by knowledgeable people, and rewritten until the story leaps off the page.
The script basically forces everyone to commit to a specific series of events, in specific places, with specific (imaginary) people, in a specific time line. No talking your way around story problems. It’s either there on the page, or it’s not.
Since even a super low budget show costs as much as a really nice house, and most shows start at a couple million dollars per episode, no one is foolish enough to spend money on just an idea alone. They want a good script, from someone who knows what they’re doing.
With a good script, the deal makers can attract actors. The line producer, unit production manager and first AD must have a script to make a shooting schedule and budget. They can then hire a crew, with locations, wardrobe, hair, makeup, camera, grip and electric. Teamsters to drive the whole mess around.
Also you can look at something like Primer. There probably aren’t many people who could what that guy did, and ok, it’s a movie, but still, if you have the talent . . .
And I just read about him in Wired this month. That movie was 10 years ago and he did something for another big film festival. Didn’t really follow up on it though.
You asked about selling a TV pilot. That is entirely, completely, a different world from making your own independent movies. You cannot compare the two in any way.
You would be invited to pitch TV show ideas after your movie - *Primer *- became a breakout hit. Now, the vast majority of independent films fail, and leave their makers in serious debt. Making an indy film, as Exapno Mapcase points out, is a separate subject.
As noted above, shooting your own pilot, or even short film as part of a pilot presentation, has been done, is being done as we speak. Most people who try this fail, a tiny handful succeed. But the people who do it, don’t come from nowhere. Almost always, they’ve been part of the TV and film world as actors, crew people, assistants, writers, film school grads, for years before they bet it all on their risky ventures.
I am amazed at how many ideas get pitched for TV shows each year. It’s hundreds and hundreds of different ideas, just for the main networks. Maybe 5% of those ideas get to pilot stage, and only 10% of those get picked up, and only 20% of those get picked up for the back nine, and only 30%* of those get a second season.
The world of TV and movies has no shortage of ideas, good, bad, potentially popular, or otherwise. What they need are production teams that can pull them off at a certain level of competence.
*All percentages approximated by best guesses and casual knowledge picked up from everywhere and nowhere
Assuming you get in front of studio executives, a successful pitch for a pilot will involve giving them exactly the kind of show they are looking for. Quality won’t work because not everyone is after quality.
If you don’t know what they’re after then it’s just a game of chance. If you do know, then your success will depend on how well you can deliver on their ideas.
I’ve read The Revolution Was Televised, which tells the origin stories of some of TV’s best dramas, and a lot of them involved a TV executive looking for a particular type of show and then finding a creative person who could deliver.
The exception to this rule were cable networks after quality because it helped build their brand and keep them on cable subscriptions. When AMC found Mad Men they were looking for a show like The Shield which made everyone notice FX.
I thought this bit from that LA Times article was a little depressing, “A newly hired executive came into the network. Made some changes. And by changes, I don’t mean switching the sweetener in the office kitchen from Splenda to Sweet’n Low. No, the change was putting an end to scripted development at the network, to focus on reality TV.”
Now that doesn’t mean that the unnamed network is entirely giving up on scripted series; just the in-house development of them. But still, as someone who prefers scripted series to reality TV, it’s not a good sign.
That’s pretty interesting. I’m still, I’m not sure what to say exactly. I guess ‘puzzled’ by the whole ‘reality’ tv thing. And I think it’s comical to say they’re not scripted since they stopped production during the writer’s strike a few years ago since it turns out that they do have writers after all. I guess just not in the “scripted” sense. Not sure how that works.
Anyway, people seem to love it and better yet, they’re so much cheaper to produce that the exec is probably a genius. You make your network synonymous with reality tv so that the people who are into the genre channel surf to you first. If he knows his market and makes the right programming choices, I can definitely see it working. Not for a broadcast network, but definitely for a small basic cable channel.
On a separate topic, anyone who’s directing advice or information to me specifically, thank you. But as I said in the OP, I really don’t have the creative ability so it’s barely a pipe dream. I do love bs’ing about it and hearing more about it though.
The WGA West - the screenwriter’s union on Hollywood- thinks it’s comical too. In the sense that they have to laugh to keep from crying. The Guild tried and failed to organize reality TV “producers” and “editors” who, in spite of their titles, actually write the episodes.
