An hour show has to fit in an hour
Actually, a network hour is
less than 50 minutes, with commercial breaks, though pay cable may
be longer, and syndicated hours are shorter. Usually, scripts for
drama series are around 60 pages, though a fast-talking show like
The West Wing sometimes went to 70 pages. On networks that
break shows (for example
Lost) into five acts plus a teaser,
writers are stuck with reduced screen time, and find themselves with
eight page acts and scripts coming in around 48 pages. Each script
is timed before production, and if it runs long (despite the page
count), the writer needs to know what to trim in dialogue or which
action to ellipse; if it runs short, where a new beat could add
depth or a twist, not padding. And you need the craft to get it
revised overnight, which leads to the next rule:
Series deadlines are for real
Your show is on
every week, and that means there's no waiting for your muse, no
honing the fine art of writing-avoidance, no allowing angst to delay
handing in your draft. If you can't make the deadline, the
show-runner has to turn over your work to another writer.
From the time your episode is assigned, you'll probably have
one week to come in with an outline, a few days to revise it, two
weeks to deliver the first draft teleplay, a gap of a couple of days
for notes, then one week to write your second draft - a total of
around six weeks from pitch to second draft (though polishes and
production revisions will add another couple of weeks or so). Maybe
that sounds daunting, but once you're on a staff you're living the
series, and the pace can be exhilarating. You'll hear your words
spoken by the actors, watch the show put together, and see it on
screen quickly too.
It's fun until the nightmare strikes. On a
series, the nightmare is a script that "falls out" at the last
minute. It may happen like this: the story seems to make sense when
it's pitched. The outline comes in with holes, but the staff thinks
it can be made to work. Then they read the first draft and see the
problems aren't solved. It's given to another writer to fix.
Meanwhile the clock is ticking. Pre-production, including sets,
locations, casting have to go ahead if the script is going to shoot
next week. Tick tock. Another draft, and the flaw - maybe an action
the lead character really wouldn't do, or a plot element that
contradicts the episode just before or after, or a forced resolution
that's not credible - now glares out at everyone around the table.
Yet another draft, this time by the supervising producer. Tick tock.
Or maybe it's not the writer's fault: the exact fictional crisis
about a hostage has suddenly occurred in real life so the episode
can not be aired. The script has to be abandoned - it "falls out." Meanwhile, the production manager is waiting to prep, and publicity
has gone out.
I once heard a panel discussion where a
respected show-runner told this very nightmare. The cast and crew
were literally on the set and absolutely had to start shooting that
day for the episode to make the air date. But they had no script. In
desperation, the show-runner, renowned as a great writer, commenced
dictating as a secretary transcribed and runners dashed to the set
bringing one page at a time. A hand shot up from an admirer in the
panel audience, "Was it the best thing you ever wrote?" "No," he
laughed, "it didn't make sense."
Drama series have a 4
(or 5) Act structure
Put away your books on three-act
structure. Television dramas on networks have for decades been
written in four acts, though some shows now use five acts, and in
2006, ABC began mandating six acts for all hour dramas. For now,
think about what happens every 13 to 15 minutes on a traditional
network show. You know: a commercial break. These breaks aren't
random; they provide a grid for constructing the episode in which
action rises to a cliffhanger or twist ("plot point" may be a
familiar term if you've studied feature structure). Each of the four
segments are "acts" in the same sense as plays have real acts rather
than the theoretical acts described in analyzing features. At a
stage play, at the end of an act the curtain comes down, theatre
lights come up, and the audience heads for refreshments or the
restrooms. That's the kind of hard act break that occurs in
television. Writers plan towards those breaks and use them to build
tension.
Once you get the hang of it, you'll discover act
breaks don't hamper your creativity; they free you to be inventive
within a rhythmic grid. And once you work with that 15-minute block,
you may want to use it off-network and in movies. In fact, next time
you're in a movie theatre, notice the audience every fifteen
minutes. You may see them shifting in their seats. I don't know
whether 15-minute chunks have been carved into contemporary
consciousness by the media, or if they're aspects of human
psychology which somehow evolved with us, but the 15-minute span
existed before television. In the early 20th century, motion
pictures were distributed on reels that projectionists had to change
every 15 minutes. Then, building on that historical pattern, some
screenwriting theorists began interpreting features as eight
15-minute sequences. Whatever the origin, four acts are the template
for drama series on the networks, but not off-network. Syndicated
series, like the various
Star Trek incarnations, have to
leave time for local advertising on individual stations which buy
the shows, and that means more commercial breaks. So syndicated
series are written in five acts, and may also have a teaser which is
sometimes almost as long as an act, giving an impression of 6 acts,
each around 10 pages long. On the other side of the spectrum, cable
series like those on HBO have no act breaks, and may be structured
more like movies.
Each series fits a franchise
Not Starbucks, though enough caffeine is downed on late
rewrites to earn that franchise too. Some typical television
franchises include detective, legal, medical, sci-fi,
action-adventure, teen, and family. Each brings expectations from
the audience that you should know, even if you challenge them. For
series creators, franchises are both boundaries and opportunities.
You can get a clue why franchises are useful if you ask how hundreds
of stories can derive from a single premise.
The solution is
to find "springboards" that propel dramatic conflicts or adventures
each episode. Those catalysts occur naturally in most of the
franchises: a crime sets the cop on a quest for the perp; someone in
trouble beseeches lawyers who must mount a case; a patient is
brought for a doctor to save. The hook for each episode is rooted in
a specific world in which sympathetic main characters must take
immediate action. In other franchises - family dramas especially -
springboards are less obvious, relying on conflicts between
characters rather than outside provocations. In these, a personal
inciting incident (even if it's internal) sets each episode in
motion.
Decades ago, audiences expected the franchises to
deliver predictable story-telling where any problem could be
resolved within the hour. Take Westerns, for example. The template
was the frontier town threatened by bad guys (black hats). The good
guy marshal (white hat) wrangles with weak or corrupt townspeople,
gets a few on his side (room for one exceptional guest role),
defends the town against the black hats, and rides off into the
sunset.
With that old franchise in mind, think about
Deadwood that ran on HBO (now available on DVD). Yup, there's
the bad frontier town of rough nasties. And it has an ex-marshal, a
lead character who left his badge in Montana to forge a future on
the edge of the abyss. But similarities to the franchise are
superficial. Everyone in Deadwood is surviving any way he can in a
world without an outside redeemer, struggling to make sense of life
in a moral wilderness.
Clearly,
ER, House, and
Grey's Anatomy all use the medical franchise, where doctors
must deal with new cases each week. But if you compare them to
examples of the historic franchise such as
Marcus Welby,
M.D., you'll see how far
ER and the others had to stretch
to reflect contemporary life. Welby, the kindly doctor, free of deep
introspection, worked alone in his nice little office. But real
doctors face ethical and legal issues as they treat both the victim
of a gunshot and the man who shot him, and they cope with their own
humanity - guilt, exhaustion, ambition, and the competing pulls of
the job and the rest of life including romance on
Grey's and
a doctor's own physical limits on
House. To express today's
medical whirlwind, the form itself needed to change, so
ER developed "vignette" techniques in which multiple short stories flit
by, some on top of each other, and
Grey's continues that
layering.
From the moment ABC slotted
Grey's Anatomy to follow
Desperate Housewives, the network mandated the
tone: "Sex and the Surgery." Executive Producer Shonda Rhimes
responded in
Los Angeles Magazine, "I don't think of it as a
medical drama. It's a relationship show with some surgery thrown in.
That's how I've always seen it."
For a different tweak on
the doctor franchise, watch
Nip/Tuck on FX about two plastic
surgeons, where the real cutting edge is in the relationships and
contemporary families.
Meanwhile, the family drama franchise
is flourishing - like
Big Love and
Weeds. Some
families. I suppose you could call Showtime's
The L Word a
family drama too because episodes emanate from relationships among
the continuing cast (some of whom are related or living together)
rather than external events. Not exactly
Leave it to Beaver.
On the networks more traditional family dramas do exist, of course,
such as
Judging Amy and
Gilmore Girls. But take a
closer look and see if you can identify the elements which update
the franchise.
In the detective franchise, a light show like
Monk on USA plays out the traditional form: one detective
gets one new crime mystery each week and, after investigating red
herrings that fall mostly at the act breaks, cleverly solves it by
the end of the hour. Though Monk's obsessive-compulsive
characterization is a fresh, entertaining element, structurally this
is a basic "A" story series.
But if you check out
high-profile detective series now on the air, you'll see mostly
ensemble casts and complex intertwining plots that are propelled by
issues in the news or social concerns. Some use cutting edge
forensic technology, as in
CSI, where the real star is
science that engages the intellect. Detectives have always solved
puzzles, of course, but the show's audience seems fascinated with
futuristic tools that try the bounds of human capability.
Series that rely on stories that are solved by investigative
procedures are called "procedurals" and include forensics
(
CSI), detective work (
Law and Order), and medical
diagnoses (
House) that follow clues to wrap up a new case
each week. Procedurals have always been attractive to syndicators
because they can be aired in any order, and after saturation with
deeply-serialized shows like
24, Lost and others, some
networks are backing off and looking for more procedurals too.
At first, viewers were watching densely plotted novelized
series with the kind of passion network executives crave. Dana
Walden, president of the 20th Century Fox Television studio, told
The New York Times in October, 2006, "It did sort of filter
into the ether. We were all having conversations about event drama,
and an event drama is a serialized drama."
But how many
hours will people devote every week to intense serialized dramas?
And if you miss the first few episodes, it's like reading a novel
beginning in the middle. Would audiences become commitment-phobic?
Several solutions exist: catch-up marathons (as HBO has
always run), replays available on internet sites and DVDs. In fact,
sales of
24 after its first year validated the whole business
of selling DVDs of entire seasons of series, which was just emerging
at that time. On Showtime,
Dexter, a character-driven
psychological thriller, offers an interactive clues game on the
network website to hold its fans. Still, networks wonder if it would
be prudent to return to reliable procedural franchises.
And
yet, those are volatile too. For example, the action-adventure
franchise that thrived in the days of easy bad guys like
The A
Team and
Starsky and Hutch has transformed to shows like
The Closer in which a character said "I'm in America
observing an empire on its deathbed, a tourist doing charitable work
among the addicted and sexually diseased." In this context,
Showtime's
Sleeper Cell is an ambitious attempt to dramatize
a range of characters and motives that are unfamiliar to most
Americans. The action and adventure in shows like those emanate from
the terrain, rather than having the franchise itself control the
story.
Nor could
NYPD Blue be defined solely by its
franchise, though it's obviously a detective show. And obviously a
family drama built on personal relationships among the ensemble. And
obviously a spiritual quest built on the "dark knight" in search of
redemption. Forget about detective work in the episode when Simone
lay dying and viewers dramatically experienced his awesome spiritual
transition. "Breakthrough" has been over-applied to various series,
and when used for
NYPD Blue, the accolade has sometimes
missed the show's real strength by referring to its nerve to bare
the rear end of a middle-aged man, when that's not where real
innovation lies.
I haven't even broached the crazy notion
that anyone would watch an insider series about politics, or the
hybrids of "reality" shows mixed with dramatic storytelling. For
instance, try mixing adventure, romance and even "family drama" with
sci-fi/fantasy elements on
Lost. A lot is going on!
Speaking of sci-fi elements, now there's a genre that has
boldly gone where science fiction hadn't gone before on TV. While
the Sci-Fi Channel (owned by NBC) continues a predictable roll-out
of fantasy adventures like
Stargate SGI and
New
Atlantis, which serve its niche audience without extending it,
the channel also lucked into the critically-acclaimed
Battlestar
Galactica, which has sometimes been more a searing political
allegory than even
West Wing was, while venturing into
contemporary relationships on the level of premium cable dramas. It
deserves to be seen by audiences beyond the Sci-Fi Channel. At the
same time,
Heroes, using a traditional sci-fi genre, is a hit
on NBC, attracting viewers who are not traditional sci-fi fans,
featuring an international cast who struggle over having
supernatural powers.
If I had to guess the frontier of
science fiction writing on television, I would look towards the
characters. In 20th century sci-fi series, the leading edge was
technology as used by fantasy heroes, usually "perfect," in
action-heavy battles between good and evil, which tended to play to
children and adolescents. Though contemporary sci-fi shows are as
different as
Lost is from
Heroes or
Galactica,
they all follow flawed human beings, and the questions they explore
involve relationships as much as philosophy; and they're watched by
wide demographics. With so much range in this franchise, if you're
interested in trying it, I suggest reaching up towards real dramatic
writing based on honest characters, and leave cartoon-like thinking
to the movies.
The vitality of 21st century television drama
has re-interpreted traditional franchises. But that doesn't mean
they'll disappear. When I was a beginner freelancing any show that
would give me a break, I landed an assignment on
Mike Hammer,
a network detective series. At my first meeting, the producer handed
me two pages of guidelines. The first was titled "Mike Hammer
Formulaic Structure." On the second were rules for writing Mike, for
example, "Mike speaks only in declarative sentences." To be a strong
man, he could never ask questions, you see.
The formula went
something like this: At the top of the show, a sympathetic character
approaches Mike for help. At the end of Act One, the sympathetic
character is found dead. In Act Two, Mike is on the trail of the
killer, only to find him dead at the Act break, and yet someone else
has been killed (proving there's a different killer). In Act Three,
the real bad guy goes after Mike, and at the Act Three break, Mike
is in mortal jeopardy. Act Four is entirely resolution, one-to-one,
Mike against the killer. And guess who wins. As I started, I thought
such a rigid form would be stultifying, but I discovered it was fun.
Relieved of certain structure choices, I felt free to be inventive
with the guest cast and the kinds of situations that could lead to
the turns and twists.
Years later, an executive of the
Children's Television Workshop (makers of
Sesame Street)
asked me to develop and write a pilot for a children's series, later
named
Ghostwriter, that would be structured like primetime
network dramas, complete with long character arcs, parallel stories,
complex relationships among a diverse ensemble cast, and even
references to controversial issues. I'd never written for kids, but
I was intrigued. In forming the series with the CTW team, we began
by identifying a general franchise - in this case, detectives
because solving mysteries was a way to involve the whole cast and
incite each episode's quest. Beyond that, we stayed close to what
human beings truly care about, how they reveal themselves, and what
makes people laugh, cry, be scared and fall in love - people of any
age.
Ghostwriter was originally intended for kids
around eight years old to encourage them to read. But CTW was
astounded when research reported that the audience went from four
years old to sixteen. That's not even a demographic. I think the
show exceeded anyone's expectations because the realistic characters
rested on a franchise that was so robust it could carry not only a
very young cast but also some educational content while moving the
stories forward with high tension.
But when is a franchise
not a franchise? In 2004, Dick Wolf, creator of
Law and
Order, told
Entertainment Weekly, "
Law and Order is a brand, not a franchise. It's the Mercedes of television. The
cars are very different, but if you buy a Mercedes, you're still
getting a good car.
CSI is a franchise - like the Palm
Restaurant.
CSI is the same show set in different cities,
while the
Law and Order shows are all very different from
each other." No doubt,
CSI, which competes head to head with
Law and Order on several nights, would describe itself as an
even bigger car.
When you're ready to plan a script as your
showpiece for a series, ask yourself what the underlying franchise
is. Even if the show is innovative and evolved beyond the tradition,
the franchise may give you tips for constructing your outline.
Writing primetime TV drama series is an adventure into an
expanding universe. If you rise above outdated ideas about
television, and have pride in your talent so you never write down,
you can create for the most powerful medium in the
world.
About Pamela Douglas
Pamela Douglas is the author of the best-selling screenwriting book WRITING THE TV DRAMA SERIES (third edition). She has numerous television credits, and her work has received awards and nominations including Emmys, The Humanitas Prize, American Women in Radio and Television, and the Writers Guild of America. She is also a professor at the USC School of Cinematic Arts.