facebook_pixel Press "Enter" to skip to content

Looking to start your TV writing journey?

Posts tagged as “Abrams”

Is a pilot script needed when pitching? (Readers’ Mail)

Is a pilot script needed when pitching? (Readers’ Mail)

Have you ever wondered…
Do I need to write a spec pilot for my pitch meeting?

On today’s Readers’ Mail, we answer this quandary with Jean-Luc’s e-mail:

I was wondering if you could clarify whether a pilot script is needed when pitching a one hour TV drama. I have heard and been told that I definitely need a pilot script AND I have been told that I just need a detailed outline and descriptions of the world, characters, season arc of the TV concept/idea. If the show is picked up the writing for each episode would be done later. I am interested in knowing which route I should take…TV pitch with treatment and pilot outline or treatment/outline and pilot script.
I’m more interested in having the TV show created and consulting (or selling the idea/concept) rather than writing for the series.

You’re asking a lot of great questions about pitching, which could also be phrased another way:

Where is the line between doing work on spec, and getting paid for it?

With rare exceptions, spec scripts are primarily meant to be samples of your work, not sellable commodities.

Keeping that in mind, let’s ask a few more questions:
– Who are you meeting with? (prodcos, studios, networks)
– What is the meeting: a pitch meeting or more a general?
– Why are you getting a meeting with them?

Assuming it is indeed a pitch meeting with, say, a prodco, then they called you in because either:
a) they want to hear you pitch something they know you’re doing/they’re already interested in; or
b) they liked you/other things you’ve done and want to hear fresh ideas.

So–

Is a pilot script needed for pitch meetings?

If you already have one, then that’s that. Maybe they’ve read the spec to said pitched show, and called you in for that. The pitch will then revolve around the vision you’re bringing and future of that world. They’re already interested in the project. It’s now a question of being invested in your version of it.

If you have NOT written your pilot, and are getting pitch meetings for new stuff, then I would not advise you to write a fully-fledged pilot on spec (unless you plan to use it as a sample regardless).
The reason is simple: why would you be doing all this work for free? If the company is that invested in the pitch, then they’ll pay you to go to the next step.
On top of that, there’s probably (hopefully) going to be some back-and-forth between you and the people in the room. It may change your approach to the pilot.

That doesn’t mean you should pitch out of nothing.

Knowing your pilot and world inside-out is an absolute must.
When it comes to content, everyone has their own pitch best practices. You can check some of my “Profiles of Television” interview series with TV writers and development executives to hear how they do it, and what they prefer.
I’ve personally sat on convoluted pitches involving cardboard maps of worlds and season storylines. Those are intricate “Game of Thrones-esque” pitches, and definitely not the norm, but they work when needed.

Ultimately, your job is to convey your show, your story, and your world. And it all starts with the pilot.
That means that, in your pitch, you’ll probably tell what goes on in the first episode. You should know for (at least) yourself the detailed outline. Past that, description of the world/characters/broad season arc(s) are also expected. “Leave-behinds” can be good too, but they shouldn’t be more than a few pages (at most).
Again, the level of details needed is on a case-by-case basis. The person you’re pitching to should know what they’re buying into, and be intrigued about its potential.

Now about your other question —

Consulting for a TV show

I’m guessing you’re not referring to being a technical consultant (e.g. doctor on a medical show), but rather a creative consultant.

With features, you could, maybe (and extremely rarely), sell some kind of concept/draft and walk away. Not so with TV.
It all boils down to this: television writing isn’t about ideas, it’s about executions. Writers are hired because they are either idea machines and/or great at running with ideas, not because of just “one cool thing”. And that’s not even mentioning how difficult it is to sell anything TV-related to begin with.

Where do creative consultants come from? Well, they’re already known quantities. For example, a famed crime author could partner with a screenwriter to sell an adaptation of a novel series. In that case, the author may become a creative consultant (if not more). They could also be a known producer or writing EP. If J.J. Abrams sneezes something, you can bet everyone will bid on it.

—

If you (who’s reading this) have a question you’d like an answer to, feel free to contact me about it.

Write on.

You die a brand or live long enough to become an IP

You die a brand or live long enough to become an IP

Like many ooga chaka-ers out there, I saw Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy (and am now feverishly digging through obscure Wikipedia entries to claim irritation about Cosmo‘s portrayal in the movie). The very positive box-office results brought a discussion surrounding its supposed “surprising success” linked to its “unknown IP” (not the Internet kind). Both claims are worth the look.

First off, Guardians of the Galaxy is the first fun big-budget movie in a sea of depressingly dark fares. It’s arguably even lighter than the first Iron Man, which had “good people” dying in it. That movie was a relief, so I wouldn’t call this success surprising (albeit well-deserved).

As for the second part–the “unknown IP”–there needs to be a little more conversation.
Intellectual properties are something “people” have been complaining about. “It’s an invasion! All these adaptations, sequels, remakes, reboots, requels! Nothing original is being created!” The truth is Hollywood has been IPeeing all over for quite a while now. Remember Ridley Scott’s Monopoly? I do.
I won’t bore you with the “nothing is original” freshman argument since mine is other: all creative endeavors need to be branded (or from an existing IP–which is merely branding in another way). At least in the 21st century. And this isn’t about marketing 101, or a cynical way of looking at something creative. It’s about the increased importance of branding relating to writers and what they create.

A good example of this evolution is Breaking Bad, which premiered around the WGA strike. I and three other people watched the first season during the good ol’ days of 2008. I’m a hipster that way.
In the span of half a decade, it evolved into a bona fide IP. The show has spawned countless merchandising items (who doesn’t own a Pollos Hermanos t-shirt?), a Colombian remake, and an upcoming spin-off. Would you have yelled at Vince Gilligan five years ago for creating an “IP”? Hell no. Incidentally, Gilligan has become himself a brand, with CBS reviving his long-dead pilot Battle Creek.

What about a recent feature project that seems neither branded, or from an IP?
The same week I went to guard the galaxy, there was another flick that had just come out: Richard Linklater’s Boyhood.
Clearly not a known intellectual property (unless you’re talking about Tolstoy’s Boyhood–but who the hell is going to make a trilogy of biopics?).
Yet, Boyhood is branded. It’s a Richard Linklater film.
Boyhood Portraits

To me, Linklater is as clear of a brand as any other known film-maker. It may not be as clear-cut to you as Michael Bay’s explosions, or J.J. Abrams’ lens-fest, but you know what you’re getting with a Linklater movie: naturalism.

Brands are to flavor (or execution) what IP is to content. And don’t think I pulled “flavor” out of my ass.
Quoting Nicole Perlman, Guardians of the Galaxy‘s original writer, about James Gunn’s arrival on the movie:

We didn’t collaborate, they brought in James Gunn with his ideas, he was the director and added his “James Gunn flavor” and a few characters and worked off my script.

Guardians Key Art Group
Like a lot of film projects, the original writer ends up being rewritten (you can read more on the Guardians authorship case over here). For better or worse, the idea is always to add (or replace in some cases) a perspective. Hopefully, the idea is not to take away from a project, but to add to it.
Which brings me back to the movie’s “unknown IP”.

Guardians may not have been a hot well-known property a few years back, but arguably neither were most of the MCU’s Avengers (to non-comic readers). Despite this, how many variations of the teams (and its members) have there been in comic book history? Many.
There’s a clear reason why Marvel has been selecting writer-directors for most of their features. They’re trying to give a definite, clear stamp on a character’s take. They want someone’s perspective, vision, to drive the MCU’s version of that character. They want the audience (and the industry) to know what they’re getting, one way or the other. See: Joss Whedon.
The studio is trying to find people to mesh with, but more importantly find people that can carry that vision with their brand.

“Brands” and “IPs” may seem like marketing terms, but it’s the reality we live in. Not because it’s the cheap way out, but because projects need to be distinctive. It’s a crowded media place. Just run walk saunter linger over to San Diego Comic-Con to see for yourself.
And that’s my overlying point: as a writer, you should carry an identifiable vision. So what defines it? When you go out and talk about (or pitch) your project, what do you brand it (or you) as? Whether you want it or not, that’s probably how your agent and/or manager are trying to sell you.
I’m not saying it’s a good thing. I’m not saying it’s a bad thing. I’m saying it’s just a thing to be aware of. Something that still should not detract you from your creative process (even if that sounds counter-intuitive). It can add to it. Perhaps clarify a single direction or path for your project. Maybe you were struggling to find the right tone, or potential market. But that’s step two.

No project lives in the ether. Your pilot will need to be identified as something. This isn’t meant to be a depressing fact. Breaking Bad was described as “Mr. Chips becomes Scarface”. For a few viewers in its first season, it was even just known as “Hal cooking some meth”. If it had been canceled prematurely, that’s probably what the world would have remembered. Instead, it thrived for years and ended as a hit. You die a brand, or you live long enough to become an IP.

Tips and stories from around the Web, Part 5

With the fellowship deadlines in full swing, I sadly was not able to update the site as much as I’d wanted to. However, fear not gentle reader as others have in my absence update their own. And by that, I mean it is time again to take a gander at some great articles and insightful videos from around the Web.

Let’s start off with this great New York Times article by Frank Bruni which is actually a profile on J.J. Abrams.
I highly recommend watching Abrams’ famous TED talk beforehand if you haven’t already.

On the writing side, we’ve already seen (or rather heard) a couple of Jen Grisanti’s amazing one-on-one interviews/podcasts with writing producers of several big shows.
This month, she interviewed not one but two such people with Glen Mazzara (EP of The Walking Dead) and Aaron Zelman (CP on The Killing).
Needless to write, they are very informative about both their respective writing process, careers, and the politics of the writers room.
It was especially a fascinating take in regards to The Walking Dead, which had its fair share of (ultimately unfounded) writer-related controversies a few months back.
In any case, they’re well worth the listen.

Speaking of high-powered writers (yes, I need to work on these transitions), you might have heard a documentary coming out next year about showrunners. Well, the movie trailer is out and the lineup is quite interesting.

And since television is mainly about dialogue (well, besides characters), you might be highly interested in this amazing talk by Steven Pinker entitled Language as a Window into Human Nature on “how the mind turns the finite building blocks of language into infinite meanings.”
An eye-opener to say the least.