The Writer's Advantage

by Laurie Scheer

  TV creativity continues to be boosted through new models and setups. There is and will continue to be internet-delivered television — not internet television (meaning television networks as we know it accessed on the web), but the internet will be your sole source of television content. This opens up a wide field of content creation for writers. You no longer have to think in any of the traditional models of seasons or pilot episodes. Think about it. There are so many opportunities for you to explore where you might want to go with your characters and storylines.

  TRANSMEDIA SUMMARY

  In closing, no matter if you are writing the next new genre novel, a screenplay, or TV series, you still need to do your homework. As future writers embrace their genres, they will master the future of that genre and not fall into the age-old scenario of re-writing what has already been done and providing mash-up nonsensical versions of classic texts. Let’s create some original pieces of content for this new digital landscape.

  TOOLKIT SANDBOX

  A Woman in Pigtails, Some Questions, and Could There Ever Be Another Wonderful Life?

  CASE STUDY: Come back, Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman

  Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman (1976–78) was a syndicated soap opera parody well ahead of its time, created and produced by Norman Lear. The main character, Mary Hartman, played by Louise Lasser, took the viewer into her world — and what a world it was. As in any good parody, the storylines played off of the usual soap opera palette — infidelity, mistrust, characters who didn’t know who their real fathers were, and the waxy yellow build-up on her kitchen floor. This show appeared five days a week in first-run syndication, usually after the local nightly news on affiliates across America. That alone made the show different, the fact that it was a parody of a type of show that would usually air in the late mornings/early afternoons made this a unique piece of television programming late at night. It was a bit of a programming experiment, but Lear had a good reputation at that time after producing mega primetime hits such as All in the Family (1971–1979), Maude (1972–1978), The Jeffersons (1975–1985), One Day at a Time (1975–1984), and Good Times (1974–1979), to name a few. Many of the story arcs included exploring the woman’s role in the household — whether or not she should initiate sex or have a career, and other feminist topics of the times. Shot with three cameras, soap opera style, and on limited sets, the show deliberately mimicked the soap opera genre. The actors perfected “the pause” — a dramatically extended moment where a plot question is left unanswered until after the commercial break. The storylines became near-to-ridiculous, but that was why you watched the show. It was a hyper-version of a well-known genre, and it hit a nerve among viewers at the time. The show offered refreshment among a stale offering of late-night entertainment and has gone unchallenged, except perhaps for the brilliant Arrested Development (2003–present) as far as parody and tongue-in-cheek entertainment goes.

  The show ended in 1978. To this day it has one of the largest cult followings of any TV show. Could it have survived the ‘80s and ‘90s and eventually the 21st century? Probably not, as it would not have been able to sustain the level of comedic intelligence it put forth five days a week. It was an exquisite serving of clever television that was later followed by its sequel, Fernwood Tonight, which only lasted a few months in the summer of 1977 and featured characters from Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman. My bet is that a series like this could find an audience today via a web series. There would be enough viewers who would understand the soap opera parody aspect and who could also appreciate the level of mock admiration that went into a show like this. Watch it for yourself. In fact, use this example as a way to watch other texts with the question of “Would this idea work today?”

  QUESTIONING WITH THE WRITER’S ADVANTAGE

  Is there a type of book, movie, or TV show that you think may need to be labeled as a new genre or sub-genre within its genre? If so, identify and name it.

  Name the last blockbuster film that you found to be less than entertaining. Why?

  Could you re-imagine that blockbuster film by adding a stronger storyline? Three-dimensional characters? Strong dialogue? In other words, could that film have been saved? How?

  What was the last series you binge watched? What made you want to continue to watch the next episode after the last one, and the next one and the next one?

  What kind of entertainment programming would broadcast networks have to provide in order for you to watch that programming in real-time?

  What advice do you have for studios for them to make better movies?

  What advice do you have for networks for them to make better television shows?

  EXERCISE

  Could there ever be another Wonderful Life?

  Re-image the 1946 Capra film It’s A Wonderful Life for today’s marketplace. (You can work with the material as a prequel, sequel, remake, or reboot.)

  CHAPTER 4

  WITH SO MANY OPTIONS, WHAT’S A 21ST CENTURY WRITER TO DO?

  So you think your idea for a new vampire novel is a good one? Think again.

  Nine times out of ten your idea is really quite mediocre and it has been done before, actually a number of times and in a number of different ways. And get this, there’s also a possibility that an even better version of your idea already exists.

  Sorry to have to burst your bubble, but agents, managers, publishers, folks who work at production companies, and any type of potential buyer does not want to be bothered with material that’s just ordinary. They have seen it all. They have read manuscripts that didn’t get made — often for good reasons — and they have heard pitches, read loglines and synopses and treatments for thousands of ideas. They have attended screenings of films that haven’t found distribution and have heard pitches at dozens of pitch fests and have taken pitch meetings daily throughout the years. These folks are not practicing their game — they are playing hardball. They want to win in this competitive market and they are looking for material they can win with.

  They are not interested in anyone who is writing as a hobby. They want to work with talented, informed writer/creators who know where their material is going to fit in the marketplace. They want to broker a deal with you to make money for themselves, their company, and you. This is the real thing. Do not waste their time pitching a mediocre idea — pitch them an authentic idea that will complement and perhaps even change the course of your genre, and in turn, their company and overall reputation.

  So, if you are going to sell your work in today’s competitive marketplace, and if you want to stand out within that marketplace, you need to utilize the Genre Toolkit List as illustrated within the next few chapters and follow it as you write or re-write your material, or re-think your pitch for your authentic text. You need your game plan to be in place. You need to think like they think. You need to know what they know.

  THREE QUESTIONS

  Development execs and editors all ask the same three basic questions when evaluating material to be published or produced and those questions are:

  Why make this?

  Why make this now?

  Who cares?

  Often the difference between an ordinary idea and a selling idea are found in the answers to the above questions. In other words, you’ll need to be prepared to answer these questions — and answer them efficiently. By doing the research and following the steps within the next chapters, you’ll discover the answers to these three important questions for your genre, your material, and your pitch.

  At the very base of every idea, the idea will be evaluated for its own merit. Why make this movie? Why publish this book? Why make this TV series? Yes, the basic answer is “because readers/viewers will like it,” sure, but that’s not enough. What is it about the idea that makes it unique, compelling, and authentic compared to all other competing ideas in your genre... and then, placed within the time frame of when the idea is being evaluated: Wh
y make this movie now? Why publish this book now? Why make this TV series now?

  THE NOW FACTOR

  You will find that knowing the history of your genre and current trends will assist you in answering the “now” questions. In other words, if you have an idea for a western and you would have been preparing to pitch that idea after the release of the Jerry Bruckheimer/Johnny Depp The Lone Ranger fiasco (Summer, 2013), then clearly the “now” factor comes into play. Because that movie experienced colossal financial loss for its studio and bombed with both critics and audiences, it will be quite some time before studios begin looking at westerns seriously again. It does not matter how good your script is, you’ll need to give it a little rest and let it sit on a shelf for a while. It is often that the “now” element can kill an idea as the marketplace is just not right for that idea at the time you pitch it.

  WHO CARES, WHO REALLY CARES?

  Finally, the question “Who cares?” Yes, it sounds crass, it sounds like I’m asking you to just disregard your idea, but I am seriously asking you to ask this question about your idea. Who really will care about your material? Remember, they need to care enough to want to purchase it — whether it be a book, a download, a box office ticket, or the time watching on TV or downloading through the internet. This is not just about the group of fans or a group with a particular affiliation, this is about who will pay to consume your material.

  Think about this.

  Think about this closely.

  A “BABY AT 43” PITCH

  Let me give you an example of a pitch and how the “now” and “Who cares?” elements fall into place. As someone who has developed a great deal of programming for women’s audiences, I have heard an eternity of pitches featuring women as victims, survivors, single mothers, etc. If someone pitches me a story about a 43-year-old unmarried woman who has had a successful career in advertising or law or pharmaceuticals (whatever field), and decides at the last minute of her biological clock’s ticking that she wants to have a child... I will wait for the writer to tell me the rest of the story.

  And there is no rest of the story, because in their mind, that is their story.

  To which I say “Who cares?” Seriously, who will care about that storyline? No one. We have seen numerous movies about women wanting to have children later in life. I could produce a list at least two pages long consisting of movies with this plotline. Why make that movie (now)? It has been made and no one will care (now).

  However, if the writer pitches me an idea and starts out in the same way — one of the main characters is a 43-year-old single business woman having her first child and at the same time, her 22-year-old niece is also having her first child — because the niece does not see the benefit of having a career and only wants to be supported by a rich husband — I suddenly see some conflict here. I see that there could arise an interesting plot as the two women proceed through the experience of having a child and discover many realizations about themselves, each other, and life in general. As the older woman warns the younger woman that she’ll need skills if the man ever leaves her, the younger woman reminds the older woman how lonely her life has been in the boardroom, and so on and so forth. Now I can provide an answer to why make this movie now — because there are many women experiencing these scenarios in today’s contemporary society.

  I can also provide an answer to the “Who cares?” question and that is that a good number of viewers will care — both those in the Gen X and Baby Boomer segments and Millennials alike. This is an idea that spans generations and therefore captures a larger viewership. The idea now works on a number of levels and provides a topic that reflects basic human needs and wants. This is an example of an authentic idea.

  AUTHENTIC IDEAS

  It is all too often that a writer pitches an exact idea that has been done before. All ideas have been executed before in some form or manner, but not all writers are aware of how the idea has been executed and that fact often leads to an element of naivety on behalf of the writer. The fact that all ideas have been seen previous to your being aware of them is actually a good thing. Why? Because you have something to base your work on, something to compare your work to. You can do your research and see how an idea such as yours has been executed by other creatives who have tackled the subject matter previously. You’ll learn how gathering this info helps with your own processing of your idea and ultimate end product. I’ve seen way too many writers develop, write, and pitch ideas that they shouldn’t have even started. Their idea was doomed from the very beginning, and mostly because they decided to write with blinders on. They didn’t seek out the history of their genre or embrace the marketplace they intend to enter.

  WHAT WE NEED

  Agents, editors, and development people all work within their specific arenas, with their specific genres, and will sometimes list what they are looking for in general. I repeat — IN GENERAL. Don’t ask them “What are you looking for?” That question aggravates them. And besides, you already know the answer. The answer is that they are looking for the next huge mega best-selling book, blockbuster movie, or acclaimed television series that will have viewers binge watching over and over. They want the next big thing, the next mega piece of pop culture, the next franchise. So instead of asking, now you know, and so let’s keep moving forward so that you can intelligently create that next piece of pop culture that every development person wants to purchase.

  WONDERMENT

  What we need is a sense of “wonderment.” Wonderment is that indescribable essence of your favorite book or movie or TV show. Wonderment is necessary in all forms of writing. It is what speaks to you alone as you read the book or view the filmed visuals. It is that energy that connects our collective consciousness. It is what takes you out of your own world and transports you to the world you are experiencing. It is what you get out of having read the book, viewed the movie or TV show. Wonderment is a wonderful thing. Most texts that stand the test of time or resonate to groups of consumers have this element of wonderment, and that is what makes them different.

  Think about adding wonderment to your material — what is it that the audience will get from experiencing your idea that they ordinarily would not have the opportunity to experience? Answer this and you are halfway toward moving your idea from mediocre to magnificent.

  WHAT WE DON’T NEED

  We do not need any more sequels, prequels, remakes, reboots, CGI, VFX, or green screen activity, and we need to stop composing storylines that are so weak and one-dimensional that they can be told entirely in a movie trailer.

  We also do not need to be creating, writing, and pitching ideas that have been done before in the same way that they have previously appeared— or worse, create, write, and pitch ideas without knowing the history of the genre.

  NAIVE OR JUST PLAIN STUPID?

  Often there’s a naive enthusiasm that writers display when presenting their work. They are so excited about their material that they often forget to stop and explore what is behind their work. I know this seems almost impossible to understand. You’re saying “But I’ve worked on writing this manuscript/script for months and/or years, of course I know what my storyline and genre is about.” But in most cases writers do not know. The result is an ineffective pitch and a lack of their own authentic voice.

  “STORMY WEATHER” PITCHES

  One of the best ways to explain this is to share the wisdom of an American Idol (2002–present) mentor. During the 2013 season, Harry Connick Jr. was brought in to mentor the aspiring singers partaking in the singing competition for that round. A talented young woman, Kree Harrison, sang the classic song “Stormy Weather.” Kree presented an interpretation of the song that may now be referred to as the “Idol fixation” — when artists use vocal tricks and fancy techniques to sing the song instead of truly understanding the meaning of the lyrics. Harry’s reaction and feedback consisted of his asking her if she knew what she was singing about. He w
ent on to explain that the lyrics express a woman’s feelings as she is in the throes of depression, she’s missing her lover, she’s definitely feeling the blues. Harry asked Kree what kind of singer she wants to be and told her that if she wants to be a great singer, she’ll need to sing the song and utilize the melody the way it was intended. Finally, he suggested that she go back and listen to classic versions of the song — timeless interpretations that never failed to connect with listeners.