facebook_pixel Press "Enter" to skip to content

Looking to start your TV writing journey?

Posts tagged as “Breaking Bad”

Drama Spec Script 2010 – What is hot and what is not

Drama Spec Script 2010 – What is hot and what is not


UPDATED:
A brand new 2019 list has been posted.
Click here to access it.


After criss-crossing several sources, it is now time to review what dramas are good to spec, and which are not.
As usual, when available, a sample script is offered for each show listed — usually the pilot episode.

Let’s do again a quick recap of how this works.

The shows are divided into five categories regarding their appeal to readers and how well they are known/read:
– Over-specced (shows that have passed their prime, try to avoid doing them)
– Mainstream (shows that have matured enough that they have become on-the-nose speccers — and a lot of people are speccing them)
– Wild Cards (soon, everyone will spec those, maybe you can get a head start)
– Outsiders (specs that will get you out from the pack)
– Gamblers (newcomers that could potentially become popular down the line — if they’re not canned first)

There is also a grade regarding the show’s longevity in relation to specs of said show.
Meaning, how long can you keep your spec script without having to throw it in the trash?
To do this, we use what I think is the greatest grading system on Earth; stars:
★★★★★ – Excellent
★★★★★ – Very Good
★★★★★ – Average
★★★★★ – Fair
★★★★★ – Poor

And here we go.

Over-Specced
Re-tool your spec if you have one, but you probably shouldn’t bother beginning a new one for those shows.

CSI/Law & Order (CBS/NBC)
Type: Police procedurals
Past their expiration date.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Nothing’s A-Changin’ for this one. It still will get “real old, real fast.”

Dexter (Sho)
Type: Serialized crime drama
As predicted last year, the Dexter time has passed, killed by its own popularity (commonly known as the hotness monster).
Longevity: ★★★★★ – If you’ve seen the end of season four, you know what I mean when I say your spec won’t survive the fifth season premiere.

Grey’s Anatomy/Private Practice/House (ABC/FOX)
Type: Medical procedurals
It is harsh putting these three shows at the same level, but the truth of the matter is that they’ve all already been done to death(s), literally.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Renewed, and renewed, and renewed.

Mad Men (AMC)
Type: Serialized historical drama
This might be a surprise for some, but it’s the same reasoning as 30 Rock: everyone is doing it. Sure, you won’t go wrong with a Mad Men spec, but it certainly won’t be an original choice.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – And not only that, but who knows what’s going to happen with all the massive changes at the end of last season? You would need to stumble on major plotlines to get this spec going, which is never good.

Mainstream
The current and new widespread shows in town that are getting read.

Bones (FOX)
Type: Police procedural
Still a mainstream procedural that’s probably living its last year(s) as a tangible spec.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Doesn’t mean the show is going to die soon though (you know, strong ratings and all that).

Breaking Bad (AMC)
Type: Serialized character/family drama
Although it was last year a “Wild Card”, the series has now become pretty much mainstream, replacing Mad Men as one of the most sought-out speccable shows. As much as this is true, I would still not recommend beginning a new spec for three reasons: first, the show is way more popular than you’d think (meaning more competition), second it’s heavily serialized, and third…
Longevity: ★★★★★ – …the end of season two hinted at a different character dynamic altogether for season three. See Mad Men on why that could be problematic.

Chuck (NBC)
Type: Light spy/action procedural
On the one hand, Chuck is still an offbeat drama that has a lot of potential, so you shouldn’t throw your current spec out the window.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – On the other hand, the series recently scored its lowest rated episode ever. Beyond that however, the status quo is simply not quo anymore, so it’s hard to find the correct balance between serialized stories and “mission of the week.”

Fringe (FOX)
Type: Police/Science-fiction procedural
At this point, the show is more fantasy-fiction than science-fiction. With that said, its procedural side is undoubtedly attractive to many.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – It got beaten hard in its new Thursday timeslot, and despite this, the notoriously-fickle FOX network renewed it. Yeah, it’s safe. Plus, the core dynamics of the show will probably not change much in these next episodes.

Gossip Girl/90210 (The CW)
Type: Teen dramas
When it comes to this subgenre, there’s no debate that, yet again, these are the shows to spec.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – The CW is hanging tight on those two.

The Mentalist (CBS)
Type: Police procedural
Surely the hottest specced procedural right now. Maybe you can play with the Red John storyline.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – This one is pretty much safe.

True Blood (HBO)
Type: Serialized fantasy drama
At one point an “Outsider”, it has now become surprisingly common. I say surprisingly because it is a hard speccer, given both its dense mythology and the fact that it is based on a series of books.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – HBO is certainly not going to can it. Maybe you can predict the future of the show via said novels, but Alan Ball has already changed major stuff. Would your season one spec really fit into a season three narrative?

Wild Cards
Not quite fully widespread but will get there given the chance.

Burn Notice/Psych (USA)
Type: Light action and crime procedurals
Although less popular than a few months back, story ideas have not been exhausted yet…
Longevity: ★★★★★ – …and USA isn’t letting them go anytime soon.

Caprica (Syfy)
Type: Serialized science-fiction drama
This category choice might also surprise some people. If you look at Caprica, unlike the early days of Battlestar Galactica (or SGU), you don’t have a standard formula, at least regarding a potential ‘procedural’ aspect. There are overarching stories that more or less get expanded throughout the various episodes, but you don’t have a stand-alone crisis each episode. If you do decide to spec this, tread lightly…
Longevity: ★★★★★ – …especially considering the regular character and mythological developments, as well as its lukewarm ratings.

Castle (ABC)
Type: Police procedural
Will most likely take over Bones‘ place in the spec world.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Strong 10PM ratings means its nearly-assured renewal. Its classic ‘case of the week’ format is also a crowd-pleaser.

Glee (FOX)
Type: Light serialized high-school drama
Probably one of the most difficult specs out there, despite its overwhelming popularity. It is indeed hard to get past the serialized aspect of the series, as well as its primary use of popular songs which contradicts with the need for a spec script to be realistically producible.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Glee is definitely in for the long run. Try to be careful with the arrival of new cast-members and soapy twists.

Leverage (TNT)
Type: Light heist/con/action procedural
Most likely will become one of the hottest spec, the series proved this season it could go beyond the basic “con of the week” and offer actual season-long arcs (and big pay-offs). Regardless, the show’s procedural formula can still be applied to your spec. John Rogers’ blog has tons of other behind-the-scenes info about the writing.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – A major drama for TNT getting renewed early. I would say wait until the season three premiere (and Gina/Sophie’s comeback) before going the hands-on approach.

NCIS:LA (CBS)
Type: Police procedural
A spec as worthy now as its older brother was in its heydays…
Longevity: ★★★★★ – …thanks in part to phenomenal ratings.

Southland (TNT)
Type: Police procedural
The little cop show that could. Saved by the bell, it is still the underdog police drama on TV and a speccer with great potential.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Don’t take it as granted though: the ratings are going down fast. You should wait for a definite yes from TNT before beginning a breakdown.

Outsiders
The shows (mostly cable) you may be tempted to take a risk on, getting you on top of the reading pile. Beyond that, it depends on the willingness of the reader and his/her knowledge of the show. Who knows, maybe the showrunner is into less popular shows and will value your risk-taking.

Eureka/Warehouse 13 (Syfy)
Type: Science-fiction procedurals
Yes, believe it or not they are getting specced; and for good reasons. Stand-alones are easy to place inside any of their seasons. Even Eureka, soon in its fourth season, still has some spec potential as a procedural. Not to mention the fact that there are not many other science-fiction shows out there.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – You can count on them being on TV for some time, and major mysteries/arcs can be easily avoided in a potential story.

The Good Wife (CBS)
Type: Legal procedural
IT is hard to define this show, but one thing’s for sure: it will become a hot speccer very soon.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – You shouldn’t be worried for Julianna Margulies anymore, she has found her goldmine.

Stargate: Universe (Syfy)
Type: Serialized science-fiction procedural
This might seem antinomic, but the truth is, SGU is way more serialized than its two predecessors. Still, some episodes can center around the usual “problem of the week,” and therefore give a more procedural aspect to the show, which makes it much more speccable than you’d think.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Long live the Stargate franchise. Be careful that future episodes don’t change major events in your spec.

White Collar (USA)
Type: Light crime procedural
This year’s dark horse, it could down the line become a major speccer for light procedurals.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – It definitely seems it’s going to be here for a few seasons.

Gamblers
For one reason or another, these are much riskier specs to do right now. You have been warned.

Dark Blue (TNT)
Type: Police procedural
This is a gambler simply because it is virtually unknown compared to the other police procedurals. This might be a good thing usually, but I’d hold off speccing this…
Longevity: ★★★★★ – …until it’s deep into its second season and more acknowledged.

Human Target (FOX)
Type: Action procedural
As virtually the only reliable (formula-wise) action-drama on television, you’d think it would be the go-to show to spec. But if you look at it more carefully, there are just too many unknown variables for now.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – If anything, the series is in strong danger of getting canceled. Try to wait for a renewal before starting on your script.

Parenthood (NBC)
Type: Serialized family drama
Are you seriously considering speccing this one? Let’s get real.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Despite a possible second season, already finding a formula you can lean on for your spec is near-impossible this early.

With over thirty shows reviewed, we can spot of few trends.

Showtime is almost totally absent from this list mainly because of their lack of dramas (they’re more into half-hours it seems). FX is also not listed thanks to their current programming renewal. The basic-cable shows from AMC, TNT, and even Syfy and USA, continue to rise on the spec market.

A lot of new shows are already getting specced right off the bat, primarily due to some early pick-ups, shorter seasons, and dying classics.
I would advise against getting too invested into a spec unless you know for sure the show has been renewed.
Besides the cancelation factor, you also have to consider if the show is heavily serialized or not.
I didn’t include series like FlashForward, V, or even Sons of Anarchy, as they are all nearly impossible to spec at this time. Your spec would be hard to put into “stasis mode” due to the ever-changing storylines.
(Semi-)Procedurals are still the norm, though a lot more serialized shows are getting some sense of success. Even what appear to be classic procedurals such as The Mentalist still have a few arcs you can play with.
The bottom line is the same as usual: chose a show that reflects your voice, your aspirations, and what you like. You really do have a wide array to choose from.

So now, let me ask you this: What are you speccing?

Tips and stories from around the Web, Part 3

There are lots of good posting being written in the blogging world (and Internet) at the moment.
Here are seven that caught my eye over the last few days.

  • – Breaking Bad creator Vince Gilligan opens up to Tim Goodman about his show in an hour-long podcast, with talk about, but not limited to, writing, characters, and surprisingly an actual discussion about the series’ atypical use of sound, color and aspect-ratio. Really refreshing considering people rarely take into account a TV show’s visuals .
  • – Nancy Franklin from The New Yorker writes an interesting piece about HBO’s The Pacific, and how there’s no “big picture” unlike Band of Brothers.
  • – Ken Levine posted a great video of the late Jackie Gleason apologizing live to his audience for having hosted the week prior an awful game-show. This will most likely never be done again on television.
  • – Margaux Froley writes on her fresh new blog about the importance of “listening” to your characters. What goes on in their lives between the lines?
  • – LAT‘s Denise Martin has an interview up with Parks and Recreation‘s co-creator Mike Schur about the departure of Paul Schneider from the show.
  • – There’s also another interview, this time by The Wrap’s Iain Blair, with writer Elmore Leonard. It is brief, but he shares dirty deets, both about FX’s upcoming Justified and the exclusive fact that AMC is working on a Mr. Paradise adaptation.
  • – And last but not least, The Guardian has asked a few authors about their 10 Rules of Writing. They’ve published in two parts the results. A must-read.

Mad Men: Demystifying the overhyped

Mad Men: Demystifying the overhyped

As my Twitter followers can attest, I’ve been recently complaining about Mad Men, or rather all the attention the show is getting.

Don’t worry, zero spoilers ahead.
If you have never watched the show, you are also very welcomed to read the following rant.

Mad Men is certainly amongst the best show currently airing on TV, no doubt about that.
In my mind however, it’s certainly not the greatest show ever though.
With four out of five possible Emmy writing noms and not a single negative article about it out there, the series sure seems like the greatest thing ever.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I think we have our new Sopranos.

By that I mean a good TV show that is by most people considered the greatest show in television history, forever and ever.
The writing is so good, and the stories are so deep, and the symbolism is mind-blowing, and this can go on, and on, and on…

Probably the straw that broke the Camel Cigarette’s back is Bruce Handy’s Vanity Fair piece on Mad Men.
It seems as if we’re talking about some piece of art that should be hung in a museum and Weiner is the greatest genius ever.

Let’s take a look at where this article went wrong and why I do think Mad Men is overhyped.

Off the bat, we’re told an average episode costs a “measly” $2.8 million. I know we’re talking historical accuracy et al., but I think we can all agree that about 80% of the show takes place inside, with at least half of that time spent in the same office/soundstage.
To compare, Lost’s pilot episode was around $10 million and is considered the most expensive pilot in TV history.

Despite all of this, Matthew Weiner seems to be complaining about this “budget constraint”:

I’m of the persuasion that budget contraints are very, very good for creativity. I think people having unlimited amounts of money makes you really lazy. And I will be quoted on that, believe it or not.

The article also underlines even more to what extent Weiner is a control freak, not only on the décor, costumes and props (which is understandable since this is a period piece), but also on the various scripts.

Reading this article, one might have thought Weiner is writing the whole show by himself, if not for the following small parenthesis on the last page of the article:

(Despite the impression I may have given, TV is never a one-man show.)

Oh, and that other remark:

Weiner would descend from the production suite with four or five of his writers trailing him like ducklings.

And there’s also this talk about how they are writing scenes around a single image in Weiner’s mind.
Wow.

Anyway, moving on the rest of the article, the parallels made between the show’s backstage drama due to salary negotiations and 1920s/1940s movie studios exercising creative control are appalling. Here is the excerpt:

The one public sour point for Weiner amid all of Mad Men’s success was the negotiations for the third season, which in his telling didn’t begin in earnest until after the second season had concluded, along with his original contract. Looking for a raise but with no guarantee that he’d even get a deal, Weiner said, he began putting out feelers for other jobs. At the same time someone leaked to the press that AMC and Lionsgate, which AMC had brought on after the pilot to produce the show, were considering bringing in another show-runner to replace Weiner—which would seem inconceivable on a project so clearly driven by one man’s obsessions, except that the entertainment industry has a long history of swatting away idiosyncratic talents, going back to Orson Welles on The Magnificent Ambersons and Erich von Stroheim on Greed. That history lesson aside, Weiner said he was “mystified” by AMC and Lionsgate’s hard line.

Just reading this should give you a clue as to why this is an almost-inexcusable error. If you still don’t get it (understandable if you don’t know about the two movies mentioned), here’s what’s going on.

First, we’re talking here about The Magnificent Ambersons and Greed, which respectively came out in 1942 and 1924.
As said above, both of these movies are known for their tumultuous history. Long story short, we’re talking about a time where directors were nothing more than interchangeable parts for movie studios. The latter were also exercising dictatorial-like control over the finished movie product. Even Bruce Handy talks about this period in the start of his own article:

Once upon a time, the studios reigned supreme. They bulldozed geniuses and turned out dreck[.]

Yet, he seems to forget that we’re in 2009 and, ever since the 1960s, things have changed.
Let alone the fact that we’re talking about television, not cinema.

Moving on the second main problem, the author tries to compare two different situations. One is, if you don’t know this, studios firing directors (Welles and Von Stroheim) because they couldn’t follow the movie studios’ directions regarding the finished product. Again I’m simplifying the various stories, but suffice it to say that in the Magnificent Ambersons’ case, the studio reedited the pic without Orson Welles’ knowledge.

On the other hand, are AMC execs displeased with Weiner’s work on the series? Are they reediting episodes? Are they firing Weiner because he’s just messing up what Mad Men ought to be?
No.
Weiner is asking for a better salary given the show’s enormous success.
Not the same thing, at all.
This is not a studio fight; this is just a monetary dispute.

And, last but not least, comparing Von Stroheim and Welles to Weiner is an embellishment of the biggest magnitude.

I think I have now covered the main problems of this article. Handy is hovering between utter admiration towards “the greatest writer in TV history,” David Chase Matthew Weiner, and this perfect series that is The Sopranos Mad Men.

A final case in point:

The dialogue is almost invariably witty, but the silences, of which there are many, speak loudest: Mad Men is a series in which an episode’s most memorable scene can be a single shot of a woman at the end of her day, rubbing the sore shoulder where a bra strap has been digging in. There’s really nothing else like it on television.

If only shows such as Six Feet Under, The Wire, Breaking Bad or Carnivàle were on television…
Oh, wait.

Okay, I have to admit, I love underrated stuff. The aforementioned shows are in my mind the true series that should be imortalized.

The Wire and Six Feet Under got, in their entire 5-year runs, only 2 writing noms (no wins). As for Breaking Bad and Carnivàle, I’m still waiting.

When a single series occupies 80% of all writing nominations despite obvious worthy contenders, when Times Square dedicates a whole evening to said series’ season premiere, when virtually everyone declares it the best series of the year, no matter how good the show actually is, that’s Mad Men.
And Mad Men is being overhyped.