BBC Blog Network

User Profile

shining shadow

Listed below are comments made by shining shadow between Thursday, 16th April 2009 and Monday, 31st August 2009.

«Newer
Older»

New Roadshow - Birmingham 3:04pm on 31 Aug 2009 Peter, I don't see a blog link for the Sitcom Trials, so I'm having to use this one to ask you a quick couple of questions - Does submitting our sitcom scripts to the ST people in any way compromise the ownership of them? Obviously I'm referring to the main ideas and the characters of the sitcom, and even the title more than the material construction, because these former elements are unprotected by law. The wording in the entry guidelines worries me a bit, and naturally, if a piece of one's script is actually performed in front of an audience before anyone has optioned it then the main ideas, characters, conceits and motifs inherent in the piece now technically belong to the public, so that anyone in that audience, professionals included, could legally use that material.

Is it simply safer just to send the scripts to Wriers Room rather than take this chance? I don't know much about the history of The Sitcom Trials, how genuinely useful it's been to sitcom writers and to sitcom producers. Is it a real and proper alternative to the WR for sitcom writers or do you recommend we use The Writers Room instead? Do you know of any scripts that have made it into production that have come through the Sitcom Trials? Ta.
Writing in a Writers' Room 6:13pm on 22 Aug 2009 Sorry but I'm struggling to see the relevance of these blogs. What possible use can this knowledge be to frustrated screenwriters in Britain? Is it not just going to frustrate them a little bit more?
Last Chance Comedy 6:29pm on 22 Jul 2009 Piers I've looked at the article now and unlike you, I am totally unmoved, and a little surprised that you're expecting us to be. If this is the most convincing case you've read for nonsexist language, then you either don't read much (like a true writer) or you just read rubbish (no offence and all that). It's not even about sexist language but racist language (it briefly alludes to sexist language only in the last paragraph). It's one of these dreadful smartalec American pieces of 'hit you over the head' spoof realistic writing, or so called satires of some piece of unnacepted language use. Its message is as preachy as its style is windy, but I guess that's the American way. It really does, to use a quaint Americanism, suck.
Last Chance Comedy 9:54pm on 20 Jul 2009 Yes, 'guys' is a great example of a word that PC practiitioners and automatic liberals, of which the media is absolutely full off, among other stuff, have commandeered as one of their own PC gender friendly stock words, and yet its origin is a gender specific (male) word, and some evidently, as Mrs. Morhino, still think it is. My female boss uses this in mixed gender meetings and group messages, and yet just 30 years ago I clearly remember teachers using it only to refer to males, but I doubt today's teachers do. Such familiar addresses as 'guys and gals' of the past serve to confirm this word's original use. So Piers, forgive Mrs. Morhino and others for not being as modern and liberal as you and other media people like you who have stolen this word and by consistant misuse, sought to change its meaning. Personally I'd much prefer it if you would bother to create your own non-gender specific nouns instead of plundering and changing some of our long existing gender spcific ones. If you must be sensitive about this gender aspect, then please try harder to devise more original words which get round this problem. Or just stick to person/people/they.
By the way, the other day, in an interview about their Ashes triumph, Clair Tailor referred to herself as a batsman, so not everyone is as hung up about it as you seem to be Piers, or as you seem to think everyone should be. What may be a hobby horse for you is very much a bug bare for many others. Unfortunately, I know which lot have the most influence on our (great) language.
I will though, as you have taken the trouble to provide a link, see if there really is any sense at all in this rapidly growing movement towards using 'nonsexist' laguage (as you suggest there is in this paper. ((Although I've never thought of gender specific nouns and pronouns as being 'sexist' myself, not in any way, but I suppose there are others with much more extreme feelings about it).)
And am I bothered by adverts and websites that refer only to females? No I'm not, though I come across them every week, and they are certainly not all on female only sites and subjects.
Writers Academy 4 03:23am on 08 Jun 2009 This is exactly what I expect and hope your readers to say, with regards to the passionate voice over technical competence. So this is good. Could you clarify though please, something unoriginal but written with passion, this is possibly what you get attracted to most? In other words, the ultimate - something original and written with passion, how many or few of these do you actually see come in? I wouldn't be surprised if it's hardly any. In other words again, haven't all areas of life been written about and shown on TV and film? How many more oblique angles do you want to see on a subject before you bar the subject altogether? I hardly watch one new TV drama or sitcom without thinking I've seen that in some measure before, which may be annoying, but I can't help feeling is inevitable now. You say be original, but that's nigh on impossible after TV has covered so much. Isn't what you are really looking for is tried and tested subjects but written in a 'new' and exciting voice? So maybe in sitcom terms, we get Steve Coogan one year, Ricky Gervaise another year (doing the same old comic monster in another slant), and whoever the new toast of comedy is going to be next year. Come on, you lot must know surely, everthing's been covered hasn't it? It's just trendy new voices you're looking for now, no?
Nine days and counting 00:48am on 25 Apr 2009 Do you provide overalls for these workshops, Michael? I'm not getting stains on my cool writer's trousers for anyone. Well almost anyone.
The Perfect 10 12:19pm on 17 Apr 2009 Yes our styles are as different as our opinions. Writng these posts gives me the chance to have a good blow out with the words I have to tear ruthlessly from any drafts I may write. So it's my kind of treat for them after not making the first team as it were. Oh, and I prefer the term shovel if you don't mind.
The Perfect 10 00:28am on 17 Apr 2009 Bury your head in the ground then. It happens, that's a fact. It's also fairly easy to spot. On the CV thing, you're the one who brought the term up, not me. And how else do you want me to put it, that 'the Gervaise/Merchant style which is now copied by many shows is nothing really to do with with the term you brought up'. I'd probably be accused of being long winded. The mock documentary format was merely the format for that one show, not the style developed by G/M within it. That's the thing I say has been used, copied, stolen, whichever way you want me to say it. You say it's not a nice thing to say. Then the creeps who blatantly do this sort of thing really shouldn't do it - it's a far less nice thing to do.

You got what I clearly wrote all wrong and simply based your assertions of my not knowing what I was talking about on a false premise of your own making. Then you go in for the cheap one liners, which bother me none. I could say it's okay to admit your prejudice based probably on earlier comments has made you over reactive and force you to contradict me at all costs. I don't mind the outspoken bit at all, it's what a writer should be, but surely you should read what your adversary writes first?

I will never be intimidated by prickly writers who play the silly game of believing other writers and film makers do not steal ideas or styles. That is the utterest nonsense. On the medium of TV it is so evident it happens, and on the medium of cinema, even more so. I'm not saying it happens through Writers Room to new writers, no, from what I've seen and heard so far, I feel this is a decent, safe platform and would use it myself. The big risk is with screened material already in the public domain. What happens is, many not so creative, not so honest writers get themselves believing that they, everyone, has some sort of common ownership over it, so it must be okay to recycle it with their own name on it, and reap the rewards of any success. That is exactly where copyright law falls flat on its stupid face, and it is a problem. If it happened to you I'm pretty certain you wouldn't like it. And not every writer who once wrote a hit is living well of its earnings, so it hits them hard. Copyright law for moving picture media is a highly controversial piece of ineffective, confused mess. Even the lawyers say this. It overprotects ownership on some aspects and gives zero protection on others. Creative media is by far the most at risk because of it what it describes as abstracts which effectively must belong to everyone and no one in particular. This is the farcical rule which allows great shows like The Office, among many others to be simply ripped off by anyone with the desire to do so. Their unique style, for me, should be protected for a certain time period in just the same way that much of the concrete material (but not all) is.
regards ss, no offence intended, none taken and all of that
The Perfect 10 4:57pm on 16 Apr 2009 No I'm sorry Mr P but I was not referring to CV. I thought that if I had chosen to put in lot of labels then I run the risk of being thought of as cocky, so I didn't. Also I believe the style I am talking about is unique, and so no labels will satisfy. CV would apply only to the first paragraph anyway. It would appear to me you may have read this first para and quickly constructed the conclusion you really wanted.

I explained at length in the second paragraph that Gervaise added much more to the mockumentary style than for example was in the Spinal Tap version. It is there that I attempt at least to describe this unique style. I didn't watch the show you say I should watch, so I don't know whether this was already in the public domain or not. I do know that the style I saw unveiled in The Office was hugely influential, and still is, and I assume still that it was the creation of Gervaise and Merchant. It is a very strong, unique style of its own. This style is a massive deviation on pure Cinema Verite and it isn't even reliant on the CV format at all, and that is why it is now widely used in many other comedies. I kept using the term characterisation for a reason, as this is what it is such a singular example of.

You are perfectly free to jump to your own conclusions, but I know what you say I said is nothing like what I did say. I may have been long winded I agree, but I found this necessary to try to describe what is a very unique style of charaterisation. It is totally independent of the documentary style realism that applies in CV. I only attempted it because you asked me to explain myself and give examples, so this is what I did. You don't have to agree at all, nor does anyone else but then I don't agree with your snappy interpretation of what I meant, because I simply didn't say this.
ever your congenial correspondent, ss.
The Perfect 10 11:00am on 16 Apr 2009 Yes I had seen a mockumentary before, but it's not the format that I was referring to. The office, I believe, introduced a new style of characterisation to our screens, certainly for sitcoms - a style I can only attempt to describe as a laid back naturalism with plenty of pauses for that trademark 'awkward moment' (which is being set up all the time) to be enjoyed by the viewer. The only thing I can think of which resembled the style before The Office is the TV rock mockumentary movie This is Spinal Tap, the clear inspiration for Gervaise's idea and his favourite film.

But much more than this mockumentary tool was new to us in the style. I would describe The Office's really distinctive style of character acting as a playfully unserious, deliberately unadult tone which is sort of mocking or sending up the formality and seriousness of everyday adult behaviour. I hope that makes some sort of sense, these things aren't that easy to explain literally. Although it looked to me totally unique at the time, I do wonder if Gervaise and Merchant weren't inspired somewhat by Friends which used a similar jokey depiction of adulthood. Anyway, whatever influences were there, it did look to me to be an original and unique blend of characterisation. The dialogue was delivered in a quirky style, and it was all very relaxed and natural looking.

Since then I certainly have come across the style several times while watching other sitcoms mainly. It is a very noticable style. I could name six at least if I found the time to research the titles of the shows I have in my head. Some were 3 or 4 yrs ago and have probably finished now. But I'll do my best from the top of my head. One was certainly Hardware, a fairly interesting but very short lived sitcom, and I think the Martin Freeman casting may have been the reason for its similar style, but I remember very clearly thinking that it was 'copying' or 'cashing in' in some way on the success of the Office, which I think was still running or had only just finished. I didn't catch much of the Green Wing for some reason but I have a feeling I saw elements of the style there as well. More recently I have noticed a similarity of style in Outnumbered, I show I otherwise like, and even more noticably in Free Agents, a show which isn't my cup of tea, probably because I find the acting style so heavily remeniscent of The Office and Extras.

Extras ofcourse can be forgiven totally, as it is the creators' own style or brand. Likewise with The Office USA, they bought the rights to make their version so there can be no issue there. But very distinctive new shows often do have an awful lot of imitators and I wonder sometimes if the originators of them see it all as a compliment or a rip off? That may depend on how successful the influenced shows become I suppose, I don't know. But just to briefly extend my point, many really distinctive and original shows have their admiring imitators. Curb Your Enthusiasm is getting British 'copies' now, I believe, as did Seinfield, and the Americans have a strong influence on British TV in all genres now. Our own Fawlty Towers has had a monumental influence on sitcoms. Who patrols the borders of influence/theft on TV? No one it appears. You can't go too far in your imitation it seems because there is no law on it. I just find this a little odd.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

shining shadow