facebook_pixel Press "Enter" to skip to content

Looking to start your TV writing journey?

Posts tagged as “Syfy”

Drama Spec Script 2011 – What is hot and what is not

Drama Spec Script 2011 – What is hot and what is not


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

It is now time to review which current dramas are good to spec, and which are not.
A sample script is provided (when available) with the corresponding show.

Let’s do another quick recap of how the list 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 (risky shows that could pay off, or bomb)

There is also a grade regarding the show’s longevity in relation to its speccability.
Meaning, how long can you keep your spec script fresh without having to throw it in the trash?
To do this, we will use 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 these shows.

CSI/Criminal Minds/Law & Order/The Closer (CBS/NBC/TNT)
Type: Police procedurals
Move along folks, nothing to see here.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – If you’re really thinking of speccing these, you’re pretty much five years too late.

Dexter (Sho)
Type: Serialized crime drama
Once upon a time, Dexter was a clear favorite. Now however, the show has past its expiration date for specs.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Since every season reinvents the show (in an interesting or bad way), it’s never good to put one’s spec stories to the test like that.

Grey’s Anatomy/Private Practice/House (ABC/FOX)
Type: Medical procedurals
Honestly, there’s just no real point in crafting a brand new spec for one of these three.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Shockingly, they’re all getting another season. Doesn’t mean it’s a good sign.

Mad Men (AMC)
Type: Serialized historical drama
Putting Mad Men as over-specced may once again ruffle a few feathers, but if you know what’s good for you then you’re pretty much aware already that this won’t be an original choice.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Although there’s a very low risk of AMC ending its flagship drama, treading on serialized plotlines is virtually impossible to avoid.

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

Bones/Castle (FOX/ABC)
Type: Light police procedural
Bones still has a year or two ahead of it, while Castle joins the mainstream list by becoming the go-to light police procedural specced.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Both are going strong and the ‘case of the week’ format is a proven crowd-pleaser.

Breaking Bad (AMC)
Type: Serialized character/family drama
The show continues to grow in fame and is probably reaching its peak, which means this might one of the last mainstream years for it.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – The problem isn’t that the show won’t get renewed (it will), it is its serialized aspect. I’ll slow-clap anyone who successfully specs a stand-alone episode of Breaking Bad.

Chuck (NBC)
Type: Light spy/action procedural
Everybody loves Chuck. Sadly this means that it is pretty much on the verge of being over-specced.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Definitely not as much on the bubble as a couple of seasons ago.

Fringe (FOX)
Type: Police/Science-fiction procedural
The number one science-fiction show specced presently (mainly because there aren’t so many out there). Fringe is a strong option, although…
Longevity: ★★★★★ – …you already know how “on the bubble” this show is, so I’d probably wait to see what FOX choses to do with it.

Glee (FOX)
Type: Light serialized high-school dramedy
As predicted, last year’s major Wild Card is now on top of the Mainstream pile. Still a very hard show to spec mainly because of its atypical world. Also might not be the greatest way to showcase your talent given that a third of the script will probably end up being music lyrics.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – It’s always a good bet to spec the number one show on television, right? Be careful when juggling with all the soap elements (they might give you a headache).

The Good Wife (CBS)
Type: Legal procedural
Jumping from Outsider to Mainstream is no easy task, but The Good Wife has proven times and times again these past few months its popularity. This is clearly a smart show to spec (watch out for the serialized elements).
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Strong ratings and a great procedural/serial balance allows room for a potential spec.

Gossip Girl/90210 (The CW)
Type: Teen dramas
It’s not as if there’s an overwhelming array of teen dramas out there, right?
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Never-ending.

The Mentalist (CBS)
Type: Police procedural
A new classic police procedural to spec. It’s hot all right.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – No need to double check, this one is safe.

NCIS:LA (CBS)
Type: Police/Action procedural
Last year it was about to break big, this year it is big. Its older sister show would be proud.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Another secure CBS procedural.

True Blood (HBO)
Type: Serialized fantasy drama
Somewhat common in the spec pile, despite its heavy reliance on the books’ mythology. Making a loner out of this one will prove difficult.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – True Blood is a big success, but its stories are all over the place (i.e. it is hard to find a status quo to base a spec on).

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

Boardwalk Empire/Treme (HBO)
Type: Serialized historical drama
Now those are hard shows to spec. If you think you can make a Mad Men or even a True Blood spec work, I’d recommend taking a gander at these two first. Especially Boardwalk Empire (which definitely has a lot of potential).
Longevity: ★★★★★ – With all the acclaim, it’s no wonder HBO is keeping both series tightly where they are.

Hawaii Five-0 (CBS)
Type: Police/Action procedural
Like NCIS:LA last year, this is undoubtedly the breakout procedural hit of the season, which is sure to become Mainstream real fast.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Hit show, clear-cut formula and procedural aspect leads to a long spec life.

Justified (FX)
Type: Police procedural
A critical darling and great numbers means Justified is getting hotter by the second. It will probably enter Mainstream land by next season.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – The show that keeps on giving (certainly for FX).

Leverage (TNT)
Type: Light heist/con/action procedural
With its fourth season about to debut, Leverage is becoming more popular and the series has matured enough that it’s an almost-perfect light action/heist procedural to spec.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Finding a solid con that stays unused by the show might prove tricky.

Nikita (The CW)
Type: Action procedural
It’s CW, meaning it’s not that watched, although it also means not that many people are speccing it.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – It is doubtful the network will let this one go seeing as it’s one of their only (relative) hit.

Parenthood (NBC)
Type: Serialized family drama
Speccing this one last season was pretty much a gamble, but since the first year has passed and storylines are settling, it might be an interesting choice.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Solid numbers indicate renewal, but can you make the family stories work?

Sons of Anarchy (FX)
Type: Serialized ensemble drama
Sure, Sons of Anarchy is FX’s most popular show, yet its extremely serialized aspect makes it very difficult to write for. If you can make it work, go for it.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Storylines are shaking up every season so it might be tough to keep an SOA spec current.

The Walking Dead (AMC)
Type: Ensemble/horror drama
If a surprise hit was made last year, this is the one. The enormous success of the show and its amazing potential makes it destined for great spec material.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Great news for potential speccers (not for viewers): The Walking Dead has obviously abandoned the comics’ serialized nature for a more procedural-like aspect.



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.

Burn Notice/Psych (USA)
Type: Light action and crime procedurals
On the limit of being over-specced if only for the fact that they never were mainstream.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – They are both nearing their death bed (even if it’s still a couple of seasons away).

Eureka/Warehouse 13 (Syfy)
Type: Science-fiction procedurals
With Fringe winding down and Stargate: Universe gone, those two are almost the only science-fiction options out there. They are still strong spec shows all around.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Original stories might be harder to find, especially with Eureka, entering its fifth season already.

Southland (TNT)
Type: Police procedural
Southland is definitely getting more traction with its third season and it’s one of the only cop dramas right now with a real grittiness to it.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Renewal beyond the current season is still pretty much on the line given the substantial budget cuts needed.

White Collar (USA)
Type: Light crime procedural
White Collar continues to be the dark horse among light procedurals. Undeniably, the show is still continuing to grow in demand.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Pretty much a success for USA’s standards and a perfect candidate for a more atypical spec show.

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

Blue Bloods (CBS)
Type: Police/family drama
It was a surprise Friday-night hit for CBS, which might make Blue Bloods an interesting spec choice, yet this might still be too unknown.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – It worked for Fridays but not for Wednesdays, so it’s still a toss-up regarding its renewal.

The Chicago Code/Harry’s Law (FOX/NBC)
Type: Police procedural/Legal procedural
Come on, you want to spec this one already? Too soon.
Longevity: ★★★★★ – Chances are Chicago Code is getting the boot sadly. Harry’s Law meanwhile will probably live to see another season.

Forty shows are listed this year and, like last season, a few trends can be observed.

The basic cable market has never been stronger with a big presence by AMC, FX, Syfy, USA and TNT.
On the premium side, beyond the symbolic Dexter presence, Showtime is still pretty much absent from the list due to the lack of dramas. HBO meanwhile is slowly rebuilding its “epic TV” brand (I’m sure Games of Throne will pop up on the list next year).
Network-wise, CBS is still the procedural king, although FOX and ABC are recouping the field with lighter dramas, while NBC is virtually MIA.

Unsurprisingly, a vast majority of the top shows are procedurals with light character serialization. They are the ones which offer a wide range of storylines without compromising the status quo.
Interestingly enough though, the harder shows to spec (relying on more complex mythologies and serialized plots) are still considered attractive. They are indeed a great platform to showcase more in-depth writing skills, but they come at the price of spec longevity.

The bottom line is the same as usual: select a show that reflects your voice, your aspirations, and what you like.
The choice is yours.

Click here for the Comedy Spec Script list.

Spec Script: Is fresher better?

Spec Script: Is fresher better?

Would you rather spec Better With You or The Big Bang Theory? Blue Bloods or The Good Wife?

I’ve recently received a few comments about the annual “Hot Spec Script” list and how it’s apparently already outdated.

[The list] is stale, if not outright old, as that’s a post from March. Might want to issue an update as it’s six months later…

I’m amused at the thought of a post being stale after six months, especially something called an annual list.
Has the state of television series changed so much in the last six months that an addendum–nay, a revisal of the list is required?
Either the person is talking about shows getting canceled, or how some shows are outdatedly classified as mainstream or wild cards. And I’m pretty pleased to see that out of over fifty shows listed, only three have been canceled in the past six months.

This brings me however to one of the core issues in picking a show to spec: longevity.
Before trying to break a show, or even research it, you obviously need to choose it.
Of course, each person has his/her own ability to take on a given show, regardless of the series’ age, and I’ve already talked a bit about this tricky subject.

There are two aspects to longevity.
The first is the fear of renewal.
As Lone Star and My Generation can both attest, being on the air is one thing, getting renewed is another.
Though it might have seem tempting to spec My Gen before it even premiered (what with all the billboards and whatnot), it would have proven to be a waste of time.
No one can really predict with 100% accuracy if a given show is going to get renewed, you can only guess it to a certain extent. If the series has ratings and an interesting story-world, then I’d wager it will continue.

The other aspect to the “longevity” issue is what is debatable, and perhaps even more important.
At the center of this is a simple question:
If a show has been on the air less than a full season, should you consider speccing it?
Blame it on Facebook, ADD or Jersey Shore, but it seems that people are not happy anymore sticking with the “at least one season under the belt” formula.
Everyone wants to “get ahead of the curve,” and the most obvious way to do it is to spec a brand new show.
Is this a ground-breaking issue? Hell no. But it’s now more than ever a central one.

Perhaps the best example of this situation is last season’s Modern Family and Community.
Both shows had been on the air for only a few months, and already you could tell they were going to be great comedies to spec. And the fact that neither of them were renewed at that point made no difference.
It was, and still is, a smart choice to try to spec them, but one key component that many people seem to miss is the fact that a new show hasn’t found its footing.
Case in point with Glee. Watch the first half of season one, then compare it to last week’s episode.
If you can’t see how vast the show has changed, you should reconsider speccing it.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying you shouldn’t think about writing a Nikita spec script.
It’s always good sometimes to take mitigated risks when it comes to choosing a show to spec. But no one should feel rushed into breaking an episode of, say, The Event before it’s even renewed for a second season.
The show is as speccable now as Caprica was only two weeks ago. And then look at what Syfy did.

If you are going to commit several months of your life researching, breaking, and then writing a spec script for a brand new TV show that has been on the air for less time than the Chilean miners were underground, wait a bit.
You need to really think things through in terms of storytelling, dialogue, structure, characters; not gimmicks.
The show might not have found its foothold in the first season, let alone first two months of being on the air.
It’s certainly a safe bet to say Hawaii Five-0 will soon be the go-to action procedural to spec in a few months, but until then, don’t presume that a show two seasons in, like NCIS:LA, is already past its due with no more stories to tell.
I’m sure a few people are already spit-balling spec stories for The Waking Dead right now.
By all means, jot down your ideas. But maybe it would be wise to hone them once a few more episodes have been shown. You know, more than one.

You have to realize that if you have so much faith in your chosen show and your script, then neither of them are going away anytime soon. You are aiming for a shelf life of a year or two at the max, which is plenty of time for you to go from research to final draft. Don’t rush into a spec just because you have found a new show and “omygod no one has thought of this but me!”
This is tantamount to being scared of your own shadow. You’re racing against an imaginary enemy.

Your script isn’t going to stand out because you are the first person ever to spec Modern Family or Hawaii Five-0.
It will stand out because it is great by itself.

Focus on Writing for Genre Television

On Friday evening was a round-table at Meltdown Comics featuring some of the greatest minds behind the best genre TV series currently on the air.
The panel was hosted by Sax Carr & Tim Powers and entitled ‘Writing for Genre Television.’
It was comprised of the following awesome people:
– Amy Berg
– Josh Friedman
– Bob Goodman
– Javier Grillo-Marxuach
– Deric A. Hughes
– Ashley Miller
– Benjamin Rabb
– Laura Valdivia

Since there wasn’t much to do on a Friday afternoon, I decided to come to Meltdown Comics way earlier.
Turns out, that was pretty pointless, though I did buy a couple of comics and graphic novels.
Anyhow, once it was finally time to sit down into the Meltdown Gallery, it quickly became clear that we were going to wait some more as Josh Friedman hadn’t yet arrived.
Fortunately for everyone already present (and especially Javier’s appetite), a deliciously disgusting food truck was present on the scene of the crime.

And once everyone was ready, it was time to shine.
The panel was very fun and informative with a lot of awesome writing advice.
Probably (one of) the greatest and most memorable was undoubtedly Ashley Miller’s three rules every writer should abide to:
1) Write every day.
2) If you can’t write, read.
3) Finish things.

Javier had his own version of these same rules:
1) Write every day.
2) If you can’t write, read.
3) If you can’t read or write, then you’re illiterate.

A few writing debates were raised throughout the night.
The first was about the (non)inclusion of inside jokes into a genre show.
Josh Friedman apparently got mad one day after one of the writers snuck the name of a fan inside a script.
Why?
Constructing a believable genre world takes a lot of time and credibility, which can be instantly ruined by a mere ‘wink’ to the audience. This is tantamount to breaching the fourth wall.
It’s however a totally different thing if the in-jokes are part of the world itself and pop-culture talk is relevant to the characters (the example given was that of two characters talking about red shirts on Warehouse 13).

You are also doing something very wrong if you are stating the obvious in your dialogue.
If someone says either “Listen. Everybody knows that…” or “Now let me get this straight…”, rethink your entire scene. Josh also said the same about someone reading a case-file (therefore listing a person’s background to the audience).

Then came the delicate subject of killing off (regular) characters.
Sax Carr kind of wrongfully used Doyle’s death in Angel as an example of a gutsy move to kill a main cast member so early on in a series. Though that was quickly proven to be a bad choice as Doyle was in reality killed for practical (read: on-set) reasons, not creative ones. The point is that certain decisions made by writers are not always made solely for the sake of the story. They can also be done because of contractual or even personal obligations.
Another on-screen death discussed was Derek Reese being (randomly) killed by a Terminator (in The Sarah Connor Chronicles). In my mind, this still represents one of the greatest and balsiest deaths on a TV series.
If you’ll recall the episode in question, Brian Austin Green’s character was swiftly killed in action by a Terminator. No dramatic music, no smash cut to black, no heroic sacrifice. Just one minute he’s there, and the next he’s gone.
And we move on.
This is exactly why this death is so memorable. As explained by Josh himself, Derek was a soldier, and not all soldier die in the glory of battle. Derek knew he was going to die at some point and he accepted that.
If anything, his death made the world even more real.
Unsurprisingly, this gutsy decision had to be battled for by the writing staff (which even before that had a debate about it amongst themselves, raging for weeks).
The writers on the panel did tend to agree though that now act breaks and cliffhangers are not really about ‘life or death’ situations, rather about personal character stakes (see Breaking Bad).

This doesn’t bring me to the next topic, but I’ll talk about it anyways: anciliary online materials during the hiatus of a show, such as ARGs or webisodes. Is it becoming an obligation?
There again, the consensus seemed to be that it was a two-way street. The networks want it, and the writers love it. It’s just a question of finding the right balance between the two needs.
It is also difficult to make the ‘extra-curricular’ content canon. Case in point with The Lost Experience. Javier talked about his experience crafting, arguably, the best TV ARG made and how, even though the story explained the true meaning of Lost‘s numbers, fans just wouldn’t accept this as an answer.

The panel continued with a question about the zombie (sub)genre and if there is anything left to tell in it.
The bottom line of the discussion that followed was this: Regardless of the genre you want to work on, your story needs to be about something. You can’t say “my story is about vampires,” but maybe it’s more a coming-of-age story? (akin to Jessica in True Blood) It is also not because you’re introducing X or Y into the pot that you’re “elevating” the genre, that’s just ridiculous.
If the allegory works then go for it, but you shouldn’t start a project just to use a creature.

Last but not least, there was also some talk about…exposition.
I know, it’s a pain for us all.
Exposition can sometimes be delivered successfully by actors, but everyone agrees that it is best not to write an expository scene or dialogue. Rather, do both exposition and character at the same time. Every scene in your script should hold more than one piece of information.
On the same line of thought, Javier added that every scene and every story can potentially be brought back to the same basic rhythm of three (beginning, middle, end). He used as an example an early scene in Saving Private Ryan that used the same principle as a joke (set-up, development, pay-off) but wasn’t necessarily one to begin with.
If a scene isn’t working, maybe that’s one of the reasons.

So there you have it.
I’m sure there’s a lot I didn’t put down here, so once a video of the event is online, I’ll be sure to edit it in.
Until then, happy writing.