Lee Goldberg
Good News for Fanboys
Looks like BORAT director Larry Charles and CHARLIE'S ANGELS director McG have been watching STAR TREK: THE NEW VOYAGES, PHASE II, the fan-produced sequel to STAR TREK. Variety reports they've sold a pilot to NBC about a group of fans in a small town who produce their own version of a canceled TV show.
Speaking of CHARLIE'S ANGELS, Variety reports that Josh Friedman is scripting a remake for ABC. Friedman previously wrote & produced the Fox series TERMINATOR: THE SARAH CONNOR CHRONICLES with writer/producer John Wirth who, incidentally, wrote a CHARLIE'S ANGELS reboot with LOST's Carleton Cuse that ABC passed on a few years ago.
AWOL
Sorry I've been absent here on the blog. There's just been too much to do. Next week is looking crazy, too. I have two important studio pitch meetings next week to prepare for…and I need to start working on the outline for the next MONK novel…and I have to keep up with my reading of ROMEO & JULIET (I'm helping my daughter, who is having a rough time with her Honors English class). On top of that, I need to do research for a pitch/approach on an open feature assignment that I'm up for. I sure wish I got paid for pitches, I'd be financially set for life.
The Rigors of Writing Tie-ins
Over at Jeff Vandermeer's blog, authors Dan Abnett and Mark Charan Newton discuss the challenges of writing tie-ins vs non-franchise fiction. Here's an excerpt:
Mark Charan Newton: You see it frequently these days – a literary fiction star such as Jonathan Lethem wanting to write a comic strip for Omega the Unknown, or Jodi Piccoult writing a Wonder Woman series. There’s a sense of reverence and pedigree involved. It has cool factor. But those authors are writing for a franchise that is not creator-owned. It’s not their world; the characters are often not their own. But let’s go the other way. For an author to write tie-in fiction – that is, fiction connected to a franchise or character, that isn’t technically owned by the author – it is still treated as a gaucherie by the majority of genre fans. The books suffer by not getting proper review coverage, and sometimes they are not even considered as ‘real’ works. Why do you think tie-in fiction is treated as the second-class citizen of the genre world?
[…]Dan Abnett: There are any number of contributing factors, and many of them are inevitably contradictory. Let’s start with a basic assumption: if you write as a hired gun, you must be in it for the dosh. You don’t really care what you’re writing. Therefore (obviously), you’re just crapping it out, words per square inch. In other words, tie-in fiction MUST by the very nature of its manufacture, be poor, disposable and second-rate.
It’s possible that an awful lot of people think this. They may not even mean to think it. There’s also a possibility (actually, a very high probability) that an awful lot of people in what I’m happy to refer to as “my line of work” believe that’s what other people think.
I think it’s worth getting this out of the way right at the start: writers of tie-in fiction may, sometimes, involuntarily, feel slightly guilty. They may be, involuntarily defensive. They know what the perception can be, and it contaminates them slightly. Tie-in writers can be their own worst enemies.
[…]Mark: It’s interesting you mention the money as a perceived incentive, and you’re quite right. But I suppose without naming names, there have been writers who have been strapped for cash and wanted to do tie-in fiction because they thought it was easy money. Hang around at a convention bar and you’ll hear those stories. So, as an aside – you’ve written both original fiction and tie-in fiction, so which do you find is easier?
Dan: I actually think it’s harder to write for franchises in many ways, as you’re constantly checking (or you damn well should be!) that you’re remaining true to the source, in terms of detail, fluff, character and style. It’s quite demanding to be so engaged, so ‘on’, permanently policing your actions within the boundaries of someone else’s property. In your own work, you only have to check with yourself about where the edges are. This labour is OF COURSE counter-balanced by the creative efforts involved in original invention – let me just say that before anyone has an indignant spasm.
Mondo Mandingo
I''ve never seen MANDINGO, and I'm certainly no fan of "slavesploitation" movies, but I thoroughly enjoyed MONDO MANDINGO: THE FALCONHURST BOOKS AND FILMS, the latest "behind-the-scenes" of movie-making book by Paul Talbot, author of the excellent BRONSON'S LOOSE: THE MAKING OF THE DEATH WISH FILMS.
But what makes this book so special is that it's more than just a look at the making of a particular film. Talbot explores the entire "Falconhurst" saga, starting with the story behind the writing, publication and worldwide success of Kyle Onstott's lurid and controversial 1957 novel MANDINGO and its many sequels over the next two decades…and the two movies based on the books.
But it's the books that, to be honest, interested me most because one of my favorite authors, Harry Whittington, wrote many of the later FALCONHURST novels under the pseudonym "Ashley Carter." MONDO MANDINGO is worth the purchase price just for the publishing end of the story…but you also get the exhaustively detailed examinations of the stage and screen versions of the FALCONHURST novels as well.
The book is jam-packed with interviews and intriguing details. I don't have any interest in reading the FALCONHURST books, or seeing the movies, but I have a strong interest in novel-writing, publishing, screenwriting and movie-making…and on that level, the book is fascinating and informative…and, like the FALCONHURST books, a little lurid too.
If MONDO MANDINGO has a fault, at least for people who aren't diehard FALCONHURST fans, it's all the details on how the books continue, or don't continue, the various plots strands and character relationships. It becomes a dizzying and confusing mess and, frankly, I just skipped right past all of that minutae to the business stuff and the compelling stories of the authors, their heirs, and the fighting over the underlying rights to the property.
MONDO MANDINGO is a fascinating and entertaining look behind-the-scenes of the business, politics and realities of both the publishing and movie-making businesses…but more than that, I found the relationships and machinations of the colorful, eccentric, back-stabbing, creative, and sometimes very shrewd authors, producers, screenwriters, directors, publishers, and the families every bit as complex, interesting, shocking and entertaining as anything you might find in a "Falconhurst " novel. Talbot has written another remarkable and exhaustive examination of a cult-classic and all its various iterations. I can't wait to see what he tackles next.
The Mail I Get – Writing the Treatment
Bryon Stedman asked me this question in a comment to another post:
I have a situation where a broadcast entity claims they want to hear my idea for a boxing series or made for TV movie. The characters belong to my family from a comic drawn by my father.
If a narrative is they way to go, what are the key points to include? Do I go as far as dialog and cameas shots and locations or simply text with main characters CAPITALIZED? Advice requested and appreciated.
A series treatment and a TV movie treatment are very different. A series treatment sells the characters and the franchise of the show…the relationships and format that will generate stories week after week. A TV movie treatment sells a story.
If the studio is already familiar with your Dad's comic, I don't know why they need you to come up with a series treatment…the strip itself sells that or they wouldn't be interested in the first place.
A series treatment isn't about telling a story…it's about describing the characters, how they interact within the unique format of your show. Who are they? What do they do? And how will who they are and what they do generate 100 interesting stories?
For a TV movie treatment, you're selling the characters and their story. At this point, you're trying to sell the broadstrokes…they can pay you to work out the rest. Write up a punchy over-view of what happens in the story, as if you were writing a review of a great movie (only minus the praise). You want to convey the style and tone of the movie. But don't go into great detail. Keep it short, tight and punchy.And whatever you do, DON'T include camera shots or dialogue.
Don't fixate on treatment format, because there isn't one. Tell your story in the style that works best for you. Don't worry about whether the character names are in capitals or not (it doesn't matter). Concentrate on telling a strong story.
(This is a repost from June 2005…and it was a blog post on this topic from Scott Myers that inspired me to unearth it).
FAST TRACK Webshow
Here's the edited version of the live, interactive FAST TRACK: NO LIMITS webshow I did a couple of weeks ago with actors Erin Cahill and Andrew Walker, automotive technical consultant Sam Barer, and callers/chatters from all over the world. I hope you enjoy it!
Why Daily Variety is No Longer Relevant
Today, Daily Variety reported that the new version of V not only won wide critical acclaim, but also did great in the ratings. In a brief, separate article, they report that the show shut down for a month, and that a new showrunner has been brought in. Those two articles create an interesting contrast…one Variety doesn't bother to explore because that might actually require the reporter do some work beyond retyping a press release. What's missing here is the context and detail that would make this a meaningful, interesting, and newsworthy story. What went wrong with V? Why did ABC bring in a new showrunner? If ABC had trouble with the creative direction of the show, does the wide critical acclaim and high ratings suggest that the network may have made a mistake by benching the series and retooling it? What were the creative, financial, and strategic reasons behind the network's actions? That's the story that a credible and relevant Daily Variety would be reporting. Instead, we get the straight-forward ratings in one article and a short, rewritten press release in another.
More Craptastic Sammy
Sammy Davis Jr. sings the theme to "Chico and the Man."