Television

I was looking for something on my hard-drive and came across this article I wrote for "Written By," the WGA Journal, back when I was an executive producer on DIAGNOSIS MURDER. At the time, I’d read a number of interviews with showrunners, boasting about how they worked days, nights, and weekends on their shows. So I wrote this piece and was inundated with letters from showrunners…and lowly staff writers…thanking me for it. I thought I’d share the article with you:

There’s a strange perception among writer/producers in TV that the quality of a person’s work increases when the quality of a person’s life suffers. Of course, no one says it that way, at least not in the interviews I’ve been reading with show-runners in Written By, TV Guide, Entertainment Weekly
and other publications the last few months. These writer/producers brag about how they work seven days a week, well into the night, to the detriment of family, health and sanity, purely to maintain the quality of their shows.

They believe the one thing that separates a true writer from a hack is a willingness
to sacrifice one’s marriage and health to the show. Quality demands absolute
dedication to the series, nothing else matters.

One writer/producer brags that when he’s in production, he has no life and that he regularly, and repeatedly, calls his writing staff over the weekend to go over story points, script notes, and other issues. Clearly, there is no escape from  quality.

Another attributes his years of drug addiction to the pressure of turning out “high quality” scripts for A-list series. Now he’s no longer on drugs, is remarried, and is content working on mediocre shows… the implication being if he returned to doing an acclaimed show, he’d be jamming needles between his
toes in no time.

The show runner of a cult hit boasts that success hasn’t weakened his resolve to do his best work, that’s why he still eats breakfast, lunch and dinner at his office nearly seven days a week. Thank God. If he ate a meal with his family, his series might never recover.

I’m a show runner, and my series is in the top 20, but now I know why it’s not a cult hit. Why I don’t have an Emmy or a WGA award. Why I’m not widely acclaimed and much admired.
Because I try to get home in time for dinner with my wife and daughter.  Because I try not to work on weekends. Because I try to put my family first and my show second.

Sure, I work late some nights, even some weekends, and so does my staff. But it’s the exception, not the rule. If it wasn’t, then I think that would make me a lousy show-runner.

I guess that means I’m doomed to mediocrity. I’ll never have to worry about forgetting someone in my Emmy acceptance speech.

Actually, I think what these show-runners are saying is ridiculous. It’s trendy, sexy and hip to say you’re suffering for your craft. It’s not trendy, sexy and hip to say you’re inept at balancing your personal and professional lives.

It’s sad, not admirable, that they are holding up their misery, and the misery they demand of others, as something to be proud of. The correlation they find between addiction, marital woes, and physical distress and “quality” is merely a rationalization for professional disorganization and personal weakness.

I’ve worked for show-runners like that, and I never will again.

These people not only work themselves to exhaustion, divorce, and cardiac arrest, but demand that everyone working for them do the same. Any staffer who puts their family before The Show (ie favors quality of his life over qualify of the work) is a coward, a slacker, a hack, and worst of all, not a team player. The truth is, these show-runners aren’t demanding enthusiasm, creativity, and devotion
from their staffs, what they are really looking for is co-dependence.

It is possible to have a hit show without sacrificing everything that’s important in life. It is possible to do “quality work” and still make it home for dinner. It is possible to win the acclaim of critics and the respect of your peers without having the numbers for a good divorce lawyer and an understanding drug counselor in your rolodex.

It just doesn’t look good. It doesn’t make you sound as tough, ballsy and dedicated. Writers, in fact, like the image. The problem is that too many of them are trying to live up to it.

I saw the boxed set of THE COMMISH at Best Buy today.  THE COMMISH was a Stephen J. Cannell crime drama that coasted along for four seasons on ABC without attracting any real attention. It was about a lovable, soft-hearted small-town police chief and family man who solved crimes and helped people in need. It was your typical, inoffensive, shot-on-the-cheap-in-Canada 90s cop show. And yet,  THE COMMISH is directly responsible for some of the most innovative and success series on television today.

COMMISH star Michael Chiklis is now the Emmy-winning lead of  THE SHIELD. 

COMMISH writer/producers Joel Surnow and Robert Cochran created 24 and are its exec producers. The staff on 24 includes Stephen Kronish, co-creator and co-executive producer of THE COMMISH, and Evan Katz, who also worked on the show.

COMMISH director Brad Turner went on to helm episodes of 24, PRISON BREAK, and BATTLESTAR GALACTICA, among many others. 

COMMISH producers Glen Morgan & James Wong went on to THE X-FILES (which was co-exec produced by Howard Gordon, who is now an exec producer on 24) and wrote & directed the FINAL DESTINATION films.

COMMISH producer David Greenwalt went on to BUFFY, ANGEL and is now on SURFACE.

COMMISH director David Nutter became one of TV’s most sought after and successful directors of pilots. His credits include SMALLVILLE, SUPERNATURAL, and DARK ANGEL (to name a few).

And what was I doing while all these folks were working on THE COMMISH? I was working right down the hall on another Stephen J. Cannell crime drama called COBRA. The staff of COBRA has reshaped television, going on to do–

Oh God, how depressing.

This was a good weekend for TV. It kicked-off Friday with a fantastic episode of BATTLESTAR GALACTICA, which has not only become one of the best dramas on the air, it has single-handedly reinvigorated the sci-fi genre on television. It used to be all the sci-fi space dramas took their cues from STAR TREK as if it was sacred text. Not any more.  BSG showrunner Ron Moore has changed everything. He started by telling stories involving genuine characters instead of noble cardboard heroes who only do "the right thing" and never get laid.  He’s subverted every other tired cliche along the way, too (but if you miss them, just tune into STARGATE or STARGATE ATLANTIS).  You don’t have to like scifi shows to get hooked on BSG.

On Sunday, while my Tivo was capturing 24, I watched Tom Selleck in the TV movie JESSE STONE: NIGHT PASSAGE, based on Robert B. Parker’s book. Like last years STONE COLD, Selleck played an ex-LAPD cop who becomes police chief of a small, Massachusetts town. The movie was a welcome change from the plethora of procedural dramas on TV.  It was full of atmosphere and character and punchy dialogue. There were no forensics, cool flashbacks, or autopsies, just a simple crime story well told. The mystery was weak, but the other pleasures more than made up for it.

What I don’t get is why they chose to shoot the last Jesse Stone book, STONE COLD, as the first movie, and then do the first book NIGHT PASSAGE (which begins with Stone’s arrival as police chief) as the second movie. It was especially awkward since a key character in NIGHT PASSAGE is killed in both the book and movie version of STONE COLD and presumably remains alive through the next few TV movies (the next one up is DEATH IN PARADISE, the third Stone book), further confusing things.

There’s a new, fifth STONE novel coming this year from Parker and I’m eager to read it — for some time now, the Stone books have been far better than the Spensers. One of the key differences between the TV movie adaptations and the books is the creative decision to relegate Stone’s ex-wife to just a voice on the phone. I think it was a brilliant idea and adds to Jesse’s isolation.

This weekend was also the premiere of the BBC series HUSTLE on AMC. I didn’t watch it, since I’ve got the series on DVD from England months ago. The show is fine, a nice diversion, but the cons get tiresome and the episodes begin to blur into sameness.   Still, it’s nice to see Robert Vaughn back on TV again.

Tonight I finally got around to watching last week’s LAW AND ORDER: SPECIAL VICTIMS UNIT.  There’s a big debate about whether or not seeing someone shoot someone makes you more comfortable shooting someone yourself. At the end of the episode, a lawyer asks the A.D.A. if she really believes that theory. The A.D.A. makes a speech about how her daddy taught her how to shoot guns and she hasn’t shot anyone yet… then again, she says,  she’s never seen anyone gunned down in front of her. But regular viewers of the show know that isn’t true. Three or four episodes back, the A.D.A. saw an entire courtroom full of people gunned down in front of her — a judge, a witness, two guards, two cops and two gunmen. In fact, NBC re-ran that episode tonight.

I can’t believe the producers would have made such a huge continuity gaff. All I can figure is that that last week’s episode was shot before the other one and, for whatever reason, and was aired out of production order. If that was the case, I don’t understand why the producers didn’t cut the speech or loop a new line. That’s just sloppy.