Rosalyn Cohen

Home from New York.  Was there for a sad occasion.  My mother-in-law, Rosalyn Cohen passed away last week.  She was 92.  Other than taking her daughter Debby to California she liked me.  "Bubby" Ros was a force-of-nature -- fun, feisty, creative, and sharp right up until the end.  She lived every day of her 92 years.  Everyone who knew her will miss her.  The world has one less great Jewish grandmother. 

Read More

My worst script

In 1993 my writing partner, David Isaacs and I did a short run series for CBS called BIG WAVE DAVE’S starring Adam Arkin and David Morse. It ran that summer, got 19 shares, kept 100% of MURPHY BROWN’S audience and was cancelled. At the time CBS had starring vehicles in the wings for Peter Scolari, Bronson Pinchot, and the always hilarious Faye Dunaway so they didn’t need us.

We were given a production order of six with three back-up scripts. We assigned the first two back-ups to our staff and planned on writing the third ourselves. When the show was cancelled we put in to CBS to get paid for the additional scripts. They said fine, but we had to turn in the completed scripts. Gulp! That was fine for the first two scripts because the writers already had drafts. But all David and I had was a title, “Marshall’s Brother” (Arkin was Marshall).

We normally write scripts by dictating them to our assistant. (Lots of advantages to this rather weird method which I can discuss in a future post.) Having done this for so long we can usually write a half hour episode in three to five days. We called our assistant into the office and told her we were going to write a script before lunch. It was 11:30.

We had one ground rule. Anything pitched had to go into the script. There was no going back, not even to clean up a sentence. We came up with the idea that Marshall’s brother (Bill) had a hearing problem. Okay, we’re not proud of it, we know it’s not very PC, but this script was never to be produced, and we had a lunch reservation. A few weeks ago I shared some of our best scenes. Here’s one of our all-time worst.

BILL ENTERS.

MARSHALL
Hey, Bill.

BILL
What?

MARSHALL
I said hi.

BILL
Huh?

MARSHALL
Hi.

BILL
Can’t understand you.

MARSHALL
Hello!!!!

BILL
Oh. Hello to you. How you feeling?

MARSHALL
Fine.

BILL
Huh?

MARSHALL
I’m fine!!

BILL
Where’s Karen?

MARSHALL
In the back.

BILL
Huh?

MARSHALL
In the back.

BILL
In the sack?

MARSHALL
No. The back room.

BILL
Why is she sleeping so late?

MARSHALL
She’s not in bed.

BILL
She hurt her head?

*******


And so on for 42 of the most rotten pages in comedy writing history.

We finished the script in about 17 minutes, turned it in, got paid, but deep in my heart I know – one day, thousands of years from now, long after some global thermonuclear disaster, someone will discover this vault, open it, and the only thing left of my work, my one lasting legacy, will be the “Marshall’s Brother” episode of BIG WAVE DAVE’S.

I wish now we had taken our time and finished it in 23 minutes.

Read More

Directing in New York

Directing multi-camera shows can be a challenge in the best of conditions but in New York, it can really be a test.

A number of years ago I directed several episodes of LATELINE for NBC in New York. It starred now-Senator Al Franken and was filmed at the Kaufman-Astoria Studios in Queens. We were on the stage next to SESAME STREET. Maria is really hot... but I digress.

Multi-camera shows are generally on five-day schedules. The first day is the table reading and maybe a little rehearsing. The next two days are rehearsing with just the actors. The fourth day the full crew arrives and you do the camera blocking. And then the fifth day you rehearse with cameras and shoot the show that night.

Shows are either on a Monday through Friday schedule or Wednesday through Tuesday. I prefer the latter and explain why in this post from my dusty archives.

LATELINE was on that Wednesday to Tuesday schedule. Usually, you finish shooting a show on Tuesday night and a crew comes in and strikes the swing sets during the middle of the night. When you arrive on Wednesday the new sets for that week’s show are already going up.

Not in New York.

We’d finish Tuesday night and then Wednesday afternoon a crew would wander in to swap out the sets. This pretty much obliterated any rehearsal. I said to the line producer, “Don’t you have crews in New York that can strike sets in the middle of the night?” He said ominously, “Yes. But trust me, you don’t want ‘em.”

O-kay.

To get around this I just didn’t rehearse on Wednesdays. We did the table reading and I sent the actors home and made up the time on Thursday.

One week however we got Allison Janney to guest-star. This was before WEST WING. She was just a very highly respected theater actress then (which isn’t exactly chopped liver). We were thrilled that she accepted the part but had one proviso. She had a prior commitment for Thursday she couldn’t get out of. We said, no problem, we’ll just rehearse on Wednesday instead.

So after the table reading we get down to the stage at about noon. Soon after the striking crew arrives. In order to get the sets in and out they had to open the big stage door. That’s usually not a big issue in Hollywood because you’re on a movie lot. But here you’re on a city street.

The huge door is rolled open and now we’re basically rehearsing in a loud construction site on a street in Queens, right across from a Gyro restaurant, dry cleaners, and lamp repair shop.

And this is November. It’s like a giant Nor’ Easter blew in.

So picture the scene. We’re all rehearsing in parkas and gloves. Noisy crew guys are hammering and banging and crashing into things, wheeling sets in and out, and yelling instructions to each other. And passersby are watching. A few really curious spectators decide to just enter the stage and stand behind me as I try to block the scenes.

When we got to the scene where Allison was supposed to seduce Al and they looked like two Eskimos clinging to each other during a blizzard I called a wrap.

And then to top it off, one of the spectators was annoyed and said to me, “Hey, is that it?”

I love New York. But there are times I greatly prefer Culver City.

Read More

Friday Questions

It’s 10-4 good buddy (a Citizens Band radio reference that six people will get). Here are this week’s Friday Questions:

Edward Copeland asks:

While I'm sure it's wonderful to win, with some of the asinine rule changes the TV Academy makes year after year and some really bizarre choices over what you think are far worthier candidates, does a small part of you ever think, "Gee -- these awards are so screwed up most of the time, while I'm happy I won, I almost wonder if it's worth it to be associated with that organization."

No.  It’s not the Academy that chooses these winners, it’s the membership. Blame them for Jeff Daniels beating Kevin Spacey, Jon Hamm, Damien Lewis, and Bryan Cranston.

The TV Academy also provides a lot of other services to the community besides hosting award shows. They have many worthwile programs to promote the legacy of television and keep its membership informed on such issues as health care and the latest trends. Check out their website.

As for the Emmy categories, the Academy is between a rock and a hard place. Television per se is expanding in all kinds of directions. New content is being providing on platforms that didn’t exist five years ago. How they not include them?

It’s not like the Motion Picture Academy. Things haven’t changed in a hundred years. Movies that get shown in theaters that satisfy certain qualifying guidelines are eligible. Period. Where they’re shown afterwards is of no concern. TV is a lot trickier. All in all, I think the TV Academy does a great job with a difficult task.

From Tony Tower:

I definitely have my own financial and creative quibbles with this new practice of tv shows like BREAKING BAD and MAD MEN splitting their last seasons. But I'm surprised that agents and unions aren't making more of a fuss. If, say, John Slattery's deal gets him a raise for a sixth season of MAD MEN (with an expected or established bump for a seventh), and then AMC/Lionsgate decides to shoot and air two sets of seven episodes a year apart from each other, but call them "the sixth season". . . well, *I* think it's somewhat dirty pool, fiscally. Do you anticipate this becoming an issue for the industry if the trend continues?

This has been an issue for some time now.

For many years the standard model has been a show films so many episodes a season, and they’re shown that season. A hit network sitcom starts filming in August and concludes in March. They make 22 episodes that are aired between September and May. Actors and producers have bumps in pay and promotions built into their deals for being picked-up for the next season. It’s a yearly cycle with well-defined parameters.

The Disney Channel found a way around that. Because their sitcoms all feature children actors they film as many episodes as they can while the kids are still in their current stages. And even though the episodes get doled out over several seasons, Disney claims they were all filmed during one “season.” And thus they avoid bumps in pay and promotions.

What’s the solution? I don’t know. How do you put a number on the number of shows produced over one period? What’s a “season?” For a Disney show it might be 26. For MAD MEN it might be 13. And sometimes you make more shows in one season to accommodate a star who goes off to do a movie or gets pregnant. Where do hour episodes and super-sized episodes fit in? My head is exploding.

Still, it seems to me studios are taking advantage. It wouldn’t be the first time.

Splenda is next:

I have been watching Everybody Loves Raymond reruns and noticed that there was never a B-story on the show. Every episode focused solely on one story. Does that make it easier for the writing staff or more difficult than writing a script with a B or even a C story?

Depends on the show and number of characters in your ensemble. If you have eight cast members and you want to give them all something to do, it’s hard to construct stories that will do that. Invariably two or three get slighted. But if you have a B-story you can service them as well.

Imagine trying to plot one story only and involve everyone on MODERN FAMILY? And then do that 24 times a year.  My head is exploding again.

On MASH we always had a least two stories going and sometimes three. They did the same on FRIENDS. The problem we encountered (and I suspect our friends at FRIENDS did too) is that when you had three stories it was like the chair with one leg always shorter than the other three. Two of the stories would be better than the third. So you’d beef up the third story and now it was better than one of the other two. So you found yourself in an endless cycle.

On CHEERS we had the flexibility of doing a single story if it happened to involved everybody (like a Bar Wars episode) or B-stories if the primary story just featured one or two characters (like a Sam & Diane story).

You also have the flexibility that one story doesn’t have to carry the entire episode. You may plot out a story and discover there are only two or three steps. You won’t have to pad it to take up the entire show.

On the other hand, I always loved that EVERYBODY LOVES RAYMOND only did one story a week. They were easy to track, often took unexpected turns and evolved into a different issue. They took the time to let the story develop.  Today so many shows rush through their stories and jam in so many scenes that they lose the full impact of what they're trying to say.  Viewers don't have to be dazzled every second.  Let your story breathe a little.

As for serving the actors, the RAYMOND cast knew that there would be weeks they’d be light in the show and others they’d be heavy.

I don’t know if it was harder or easier to plot just one story an episode but RAYMOND was textbook on how to do it right.

What’s your Friday Question? Please leave it in the comments section.

Read More

My review of THE CRAZY ONES

THE CRAZY ONES, heralding Robin Williams’ return to the small screen debuted last week to big numbers for CBS. It handily trounced the new Michael J. Fox sitcom on NBC. CBS is touting it as this season’s runaway hit. And maybe it is. It’s sure off to a good start.

But…

It was coming off the one hour premier of THE BIG BANG THEORY, which got the best numbers it has ever gotten. It featured a big name and was heavily promoted. Actually, several big names. Sarah Michelle Geller is no slouch and producer/creator David E. Kelley is a proven 800 pound gorilla.

Personally, I had problems with THE CRAZY ONES. Here’s why:

There’s an expression that comedy writers have called “Like-a-joke.” It’s a line that has the rhythm of a joke but no real punch line. They’re just words strung together, done with funny accents, goofy voices, or comic style windups. But ultimately there’s no there there. That’s what THE CRAZY ONES was. I guess they figured if Robin Williams could just be manic for a half hour and barrage you with shtick that you’d laugh.

But nothing he said was funny. It was all forced. And then having a character whose sole function was to laugh at his routines made it seem all the more desperate.

In a way, I was a little annoyed at the show. It’s as if Kelley was saying, “Just throw a lot of stuff at the audience real fast in a super slick package and they won’t know any better.” God, I hope he’s not right.

The unstated issue here is that David E. Kelley is not a comedy writer. He’s a wonderful drama and light-drama writer. I’ve loved his work since L.A. LAW and marvel at how prolific he is. There are episodes of THE PRACTICE that rival the writing of any of today’s extraordinary dramas.

But he’s not a comedy writer. Throwing in a funny line now and again or creating quirky characters is not the same as constructing a half-hour with wall-to-wall laughs.

And the sense I got was that Robin was probably ad libbing like crazy trying to make something of the material.

Any chance they could get the MORK writers? They’re probably all available.

Aside from that they had Sarah Michelle Geller in the world’s most thankless role. She’s the wet blanket – always scowling, always rolling her eyes. “Dad, you can’t do that.” “Dad, you can’t say that.” Ugh!  At least Mindy wasn’t asked to always be exasperated.

Rounding out the cast was James Wolk playing the exact same character he plays on MAD MEN (only the ad agency is different), and Hamish Linklater playing the character he’s played in eight other series.

I also didn’t appreciate being subjected to a half hour commercial for McDonalds.

All in all, I just felt manipulated. To borrow a phrase from another fast food chain – “Where’s the beef?”

In deference to Robin Williams I’ll probably watch another episode. And it was just the pilot. Many series need the time to grow and find themselves. But one more McDLT and I’m gone.

Read More

What "coverage" looks like

When writers turn in screenplays, producers, agencies, and studios generally hire people to read them and submit a report.  These reports are called "coverage."  Many times projects live or die based on their coverage.  As an example of one, here is our coverage for the screenplay we wrote for VOLUNTEERS (which eventually became a movie starring Tom Hanks and John Candy).  Once you read it you'll know why I saved it all these years.   If only all of our coverage from all of our screenplays could receive this kind of reaction. 

Read More

Some of my readers are idiots

A big part of this blog is you – your comments. I’ve said this before, your comments are often more interesting than my posts. There are times I write posts specifically because I’m interested in what your take is on a topic. I enjoy your insight, point-of-view, and often we get insiders who really illuminate a subject from the first hand knowledge that I don’t have.  So I thank you all and invite you to continue weighing in. 

I rarely delete commenters who disagree with me. If they post as Anonymous or say really hateful inappropriate things then yes, I zap them, but most of the time I just let ‘em fly. I don’t want this to be the kind of blog where only people who support me are allowed a voice.

Besides, some of the criticism has led to great debates. And I will admit that some of your criticism is valid. I’ve even been known to change a position or two based on your contrarian arguments. I hate when that happens because I’m, y’know, always right, but I do.

I also rarely respond in the comments section to opposing views. That’s the forum for you to debate the issues, not me.

But…

Sometimes I’ll read a comment and just have to shake my head. One such comment was yesterday’s regarding my post on the CHEERS actors missing run-throughs. This was the comment verbatim:

Anonymous said...

I'm with Elf on that one. Besides, writers wag the dog too much on sitcoms. They're paid big bucks to deliver a script that works. That's their JOB. Those who cry about needing the actors around to "tweak" the script are weak hacks. We're talking about a 20 minute loaded sketch here, with completely defined characters! They're not writing "streecar named desire" for chrissake. If the actors have their shit wired-and that's what THEY'RE being paid the big bucks for, you don't need repeated run-throughs, aside from blocking the scene.

This mythology has been created by weak writers who can't deliver a good script consistently, looking to cover their weak asses.

Crybaby writers...

CRYBABIES!!! Makes me so mad... And YOU let 'em DO it, Ken!!!! Pat yourself on the back!! Buy yourself an ice cream cone!! You deserve it!!

goddammit... some people's writers... give 'em a fuckin' inch... inmates running the goddamn asylum... patty-cake playing em-effers... dogs is what they are... DOGS!!

-Cheers Fan

Okay, the text is not even worth debating. The point I want to make, and I suspect most of my readers would agree, is…

I get some real morons who comment on this blog. I mean, some certifiable string-collecting drooling idiots.

Now, I realize that statement may result in a flurry of outrage from the morons and idiots, but so be it unless they cross the line and I delete them.  Yes, I'm giving this cretin attention but after almost eight years of blogging and ignoring I felt it was time to finally say something.  Usually, I'll email friends and say, "Oh you've gotta see this comment some imbecile wrote." 

One thing I’ve learned is that my blog is not unique. These trolls are everywhere, and they can turn most any topic into an angry rant. I’ve seen recipe posts lead to tirades against Obamacare. I’ve seen photos of cute puppies somehow lead to an attack against certian ethnic groups. It would be hilarious if it weren’t so disturbing.

At least in the days of Cliff Clavin they were just loveable cranks. Today they are enraged maniacs allowed to rave without any accountability. They don’t need facts, logic, coherence, or even a name.

You think the founding fathers would have drafted the First Amendment differently if they had an inkling that one day there would be the internet? Might Thomas Jefferson have said, “they can click like but that’s it.”?

Until I can customize my blog to have two comment sections -- one for comments and one for stupid comments, I’ll just have to monitor more closely the comments I do get. Maybe if the word verification feature didn’t just ask to repeat a series of letters but instead was a question like “what color is the White House?” or “what color is an orange?” it would weed out 90% of the trolls. I could even do occasional posts about politics or religion. Or puppies.

Read More