Television Development

by Bob Levy

  Straight-to-series orders are not new. Before streaming and cable existed, broadcast networks occasionally made straight-to-series commitments to projects in extremely competitive situations. If a studio shopped a project that all the networks wanted and were willing to pay dearly for, the studio could leverage the interest into a competitive auction situation and demand “13 on the air” or “22 on the air,” meaning the network buyer committed to paying 13 or 22 license fees for that many guaranteed episodes along with a slot on its fall schedule. The networks hedged their bets by building several steps into the commitment along with penalties. That means a script for the first episode would be evaluated, and if the network didn’t like it, it had the right to end the project. If the network exercised its right to kill a project before it aired, it had to pay a penalty, typically quite a large financial penalty but not nearly as large as 13 or 22 license fees. The network would also typically shoot the first episode during its pilot season and could pull the plug on the project at that stage, before further series production commenced, and pay a different pre-negotiated penalty to the studio.

  Most straight-to-series projects at Netflix and other streaming and cable companies today still provide the network with the ability to shut down the project before production commences if the network determines the work is not what they were expecting. Scripts have to be written before episodes are shot, and if the network doesn’t like the scripts or doesn’t think they’re in line with what they thought they bought, the network can pull the plug on the series before production starts. It’s not cheap to do that, but it’s cheaper than shooting a season of episodes in which the network has no faith.

  Netflix began the current straight-to-series model in 2011 with its first original scripted series House of Cards.1 The fact that House of Cards was perceived by the industry as both commercially and creatively successful has contributed to straight-to-series becoming more common in the industry.

  House of Cards also introduced one of the early hallmarks of straight-to-series development, A-list auspices. “If you deliver an A-list star, writer and/or director,” the network seems to have said, “we won’t make you jump through the usual development hoops. We’ll order your project straight-to-series.” When Netflix did it and it worked, the whole town took notice. Studios, agents and producers looked to other networks for similarly sized commitments, and other networks stepped up.

  Networks compete for the best new projects, and they express their level of interest by the level of commitment they offer. They can offer to pay for a pilot script (known as a “script commitment”), they can make a put-pilot commitment or, at the highest level, they can offer a straight-to-series commitment. They can offer a one-season straight-to-series commitment or as many seasons as they want. Most straight-to-series commitments are determined by the marketplace, by how many networks want a project and how much they’re willing to commit to get it. Netflix’s two-season straight-to-series commitment to House of Cards introduced the network to the scripted series development marketplace as an aggressive buyer with deep pockets.

  Studios, producers and creators typically consider a second factor when they evaluate competing offers for their projects. Creative control. A central part of Netflix’s development strategy is giving A-list talent virtually complete creative control. As I’ve described, networks have traditionally been very hands-on creatively with their development and current series (“He who pays the piper …”), and trends in the last 15 years have seen networks only increase their creative control. Netflix said, “No. We’ll work with the best people on the best projects and respect them to deliver the work they pitched us.”

  They guaranteed the producers of House of Cards a reported $100 million,2 and said, “Go make two seasons, and let us know when the first season is done.” Total creative control is extraordinarily attractive to top talent, and Netflix has continued to use it as a lure to attract great development.

  Netflix altered the Hollywood development process in three significant ways. First by guaranteeing large series commitments and, second, by taking a hands-off approach to the creative side of the development process. Then they escalated the price of development deals by making agreements with two of TV’s most successful creator/producers, Shonda Rhimes and Ryan Murphy, for reportedly $150 million and $300 million respectively. Warner Bros. Television responded by locking up one of its most successful creator/producers, Greg Berlanti, in a $300 million six-year extension of his overall deal.3 Netflix announced itself as an aggressive buyer, maker, owner and distributor of content in its effort to capture as much share of the streaming media marketplace as possible, at the dawn of that new business. Other networks and studios are stepping up to compete, but so far most other TV companies are not giving artists the same level of creative freedom that Netflix does.

  In Chapter 1 I mentioned that Netflix is challenging the traditional distinctions between networks and studios by both producing and distributing series like Stranger Things, The OA and others. A new way it’s breaking down those traditional boundaries is in its recent deals with writer/producers like Rhimes and Murphy. Traditionally studios made overall deals with writers and producers to own their creative output and the shows that emerged from it. Netflix is not only competing with networks like CBS, HBO and Hulu by distributing TV series, it’s competing with TV studios by making overall deals with writers (and compelling studios like Warner Bros. to lock up talent before Netflix lures them away).

  Elements of Straight-to-Series

  Let’s look more closely at how straight-to-series development works. In traditional pilot development writers, producers and studios typically spend several months developing a pitch and then shopping it to networks. With straight-to-series projects sellers spend much more than a few months assembling a substantial and thorough package of creative elements. The House of Cards team, for example, spent a year and a half developing the project internally before taking it out to network buyers. One of the first and most important elements of the package is typically a spec pilot script (again, technically it’s not a “pilot” script, but an “episode one” script), which, of course, requires the services of a screenwriter. With House of Cards, they actually developed scripts for the first three episodes. Next, straight-to-series projects usually incorporate an extensive “series bible,” a prose document that states the vision of the series and its creative direction for the life of the series, an outline of story arcs of the first several seasons (or entire series, if possible), and detailed summaries of every story of every episode of the first season or two. Sometimes a shorter version of this document, known as a “format” document, is used. (Series bibles are usually around 30 pages, while format documents might be ten pages.) Next, most straight-to-series contenders are “packaged up”: Not only is a writer on board, but also a well-respected non-writing EP and typically a star actor and/or A-list director are attached. Usually the director is prepared to commit to directing many if not all the episodes of the series. In the case of House of Cards, the project famously included a then A-list movie star, an A-list feature director (who had never deigned to direct TV before), a screenwriter and two well-respected non-writing EPs, in addition to three scripts and a series bible.

  Typically straight-to-series contenders are shopped to networks by senior studio execs, producers or agents. They call development execs at the targeted networks, pitch the project in logline form along with its (no doubt stellar) auspices and explain that the sellers are looking for a straight-to-series order. If a network exec responds to the pitch, the seller emails the script/s and series bible, and the network execs read the material and determine their level of interest. Given the size of the commitment under consideration, senior network execs often turn to the network president to weigh in. Interested networks notify the sellers and ask for a meeting. Sellers book a round of meetings at interested network buyers and typically the “whole package” shows up en masse, the writer, the star/s, t
he director, the non-writing EPs and the studio execs, to discuss the materials they submitted, articulate their series vision beyond the bible already delivered, and to field questions or address concerns the network execs raise. To a great extent, the meeting step is useful for networks to assess how committed the high-level auspices attached to the project really are, and, conversely, it’s a chance for the selling team to demonstrate their passion and commitment to the project.

  Interested buyer networks make offers, and the sellers choose a winner typically based on the size of the financial offer, the size of the series commitment, the prestige of the network, the likelihood of the project’s success at the network and, lastly, any possible personal and/or business relationships with senior network personnel. In a competitive situation, the seller picks a winner, and the details of a deal guaranteeing one or two seasons is negotiated.

  Instead of writing a pilot script and potentially producing a pilot for network consideration, the sellers get straight to work prepping and producing the first season of episodes. A writing staff is hired, the rest of the series is cast, additional directors (if needed) are slotted, and episodes are produced and delivered to the network.

  The creative elements described above are the most common elements of a straight-to-series package, but – as mentioned throughout the book – every project is unique, and a variety of different approaches can earn a straight-to-series order at Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, HBO and other networks. Netflix ordered a season of Green Eggs and Ham from a pitch rather than a script and series bible. Writer Jared Stern (who created Dr. Ken and wrote several features) pitched detailed stories for the first 13 animated episodes along with a vision for future seasons, and he showed well-developed artwork tailored for each Season One episode. The package also included two important non-writing EP elements, Ellen DeGeneres and feature director David Dobkin.

  Netflix also develops using a process known as “script-to-series.” Script-to-series development is similar to the traditional piloting development process, but without the pilot. Execs hear a pitch and order a script for the first episode of the series (or in some cases scripts for the first two episodes of the series), and base a series order decision on the scripted material and a series pitch, either oral or in written bible or format form.

  Do most creators want to sell their projects to Netflix and enjoy its hands-off creative approach? Why wouldn’t every writer and producer want to work for Netflix? To a great extent, they do. But there are reasons why sellers don’t always consider Netflix an ideal home.

  First, it takes a lot more time, effort and potentially money to build the complete package of elements Netflix looks for in straight-to-series contenders. Studio execs, producers and agents don’t believe every new project merits the investment of spec’ing a full pilot script, developing a 30-page series bible and attaching high-level producers, stars and director. Developing a 20-minute pitch with a writer is a lot cheaper and easier, and the risks of failure are much lower.

  If a studio wants to develop a straight-to-series contender, it pays a writer to write the script internally at the studio. Pitching projects, on the other hand, usually doesn’t require the studio to spend up-front money. If a studio doesn’t have a long-term development deal with a writer (which I’ll talk about later in this chapter), a studio will typically make what’s known as an “if-come deal” with the writer before taking out the pitch. In an if-come deal, a studio guarantees the writer a specific amount of money to write the pilot script if a network buys it. In other words, the writer agrees to develop and shop a pitch on spec with no guaranteed payment. Shopping pitches with if-come writer deals is a lot cheaper for studios than paying to build huge straight-to-series packages.

  Second, there’s currently less potential upside for sellers in success at Netflix. While there’s enormous variation in the deals Netflix makes for new projects, its fundamental approach to distribution differs markedly from industry standards. Netflix typically doesn’t license first-window of domestic distribution like most other networks. Rather than paying studios license fees for episodes – allowing studios the ability to reap all ancillary revenues – Netflix often pays what’s known as “cost-plus” fees, the cost of production plus a built-in, pre-determined “profit” fee, in exchange for all distribution, worldwide, in perpetuity. The studio is guaranteed profit upfront, but the profits are capped.

  Traditionally studios (and their various profit participants, i.e., creators, non-writing EPs, pilot directors and agencies via packages) make more money the more successful a show becomes. The bigger the hit a series becomes, the more international interest, the more domestic after-market distributor interest, the higher the profits a studio and the profit participants can earn. Netflix’s cost-plus buyout limits the profits a hit show can earn.

  Another reason sellers may be skeptical of Netflix is, ironically, the vast quantity of content it buys. Netflix programs so many shows that it can’t give all of them the high level marketing support it gives its top-tier series. Sellers want to produce series that stay on the air, but they also want to produce series that become hits and impact many viewers. Netflix programs so many series that some sellers are concerned their shows – even if given multiple seasons – can get lost in the mix.

  One final observation about Netflix: The company is leading the way in using its data to evaluate development. Networks have traditionally incorporated program research into development decisions, as I’ve discussed throughout the book, and networks have relied on Nielsen ratings to assess series performance on the air. But no networks have ever had the specific performance data to which today’s streaming platforms have access. Netflix and other streamers know exactly which viewers are watching what, when they tune a show out and what they binge on for hours on end. Projects pitched to Netflix are typically subject to the company’s data-driven analysis. Netflix uses its data and algorithms to specifically assess if a show about a specific kind of subject matter, set in a specific world with specific actors, will appeal to its audience, and often makes development decisions based on the results of that math.

  Spec Pilot Scripts

  Most development designed to earn straight-to-series commitments requires writers to write at least a first episode script on spec (even if they’re paid by a studio or production company that’s bearing the speculative risk). Demonstrating what an episode looks like on the page, introducing the concept, characters and world in dramatic form, is usually the single most important element of the straight-to-series package. But spec’ing pilot scripts has long been an alternative development strategy for traditional pilot development too. In this scenario, the writer writes a complete pilot script and shops it to networks rather than delivering an oral pitch to potential network buyers. The spec pilot is typically ordered to pilot production and considered alongside other pilots that the network spent months developing. Why? Why would a writer go to all that extra trouble of writing a pilot on spec if he’s entering the same pilot process he could have entered with far less effort by developing a pitch?

  Before addressing that question, let’s put spec pilot scripts in perspective: Aside from projects seeking straight-to-series orders, spec pilot scripts represent a small fraction of TV development today. Buyer trends favoring spec pilots versus pitches ebbs and flows in TV development (subject to trends and fads like everything else in Hollywood), and, as of this writing, spec pilot scripts are not nearly as attractive to networks buyers as pitches.

  This is primarily because network execs today tend to want to be more hands-on from the outset of their projects and to enjoy the sense of ownership that goes with it. In many cases network development execs are acting more producorial than before, identifying IP or ideating areas (like In the Dark) and, in many cases, packaging their projects themselves. As more companies enter the scripted series business, many are branding themselves very specifically, motivating execs to feel the need to tailor their development within their narr
ow network identity and for their discrete segment of the audience.

  So why do writers and studios ever spec pilot scripts intended for piloting consideration? First, some writers – even successful, in-demand writers who could easily sell pitches – prefer to spec pilots because it allows them greater creative freedom and control of the writing stage of development. Instead of writing multiple drafts of a story outline and a pilot script with network input on every draft, a writer can maintain far more creative control of the writing process if she writes with the intention of shopping a finished script. Almost invariably, the network that buys the script will have creative notes, but it won’t have nearly as much input as it would if its execs were present at every stage of the script’s creation.

  A finished spec pilot script also potentially gives the writer (and his studio and producer partners) more control attaching other talent elements. Actors and directors who are open to projects in development are more open to considering a finished script than a pitch. There’s more to go on, more completed work to base decisions about making a commitment on. The writer and his partners therefore may be able to avoid the network casting and pilot director selection processes by packaging those elements before a network joins a project. The risk with this strategy, of course, is that network buyers may like the pilot script but not the other talent elements, meaning the sellers have damaged a valuable project rather than improved it.