Quote: Chappers @ 13th May 2019, 10:18 PMIt's all peoples tastes I suppose. For instance I was never a great fan of Rising Damp.
Ghosts - Series 1 Page 10
Those "painful attempts" at humour would be better described as innocent and whimsical. And are why many of us like Ghosts.
Also, each episode is written by just one or two of the group. They created the scenario and characters as a team, however.
Quote: Aaron @ 17th May 2019, 9:22 PMThose "painful attempts" at humour would be better described as innocent and whimsical. And are why many of us like Ghosts.
Also, each episode is written by just one or two of the group. They created the scenario and characters as a team, however.
More like naive. Which shouldn't be the case at this level, surely?
There doesn't appear to be a discernable difference between the quality of episodes, regardless of which team members wrote them.
Still, I'll watch episode 6 anyway, with the faint hope that I 'get' it, not to find something wrong.
I'll also hold on to the hope that somebody would be so kind as to give me, a would be writer, some examples of what tickled their fancy to assist in my quest to understand what qualifies as worthy of commission these days.
Quote: garyd @ 17th May 2019, 10:26 PMStill, I'll watch episode 6 anyway, with the faint hope that I 'get' it, not to find something wrong.
I'll also hold on to the hope that somebody would be so kind as to give me, a would be writer, some examples of what tickled their fancy to assist in my quest to understand what qualifies as worthy of commission these days.
Why though? Genuinely. An out of context quote posted here I find funny isn't going to make you laugh any more than in the context of the show. If you dislike it so much then why put yourself through watching it at all? There are a million and one other things to watch!
Quote: Sitcomfan64 @ 17th May 2019, 11:17 PMWhy though? Genuinely.
You seem to be responding in the same vein as Old Lady Leg by refusing to tell garyd what you find funny because you feel fairly sure that garyd will not find it funny.
While I fully support your right (and hers) to refuse to tell garyd which scenes and lines you find particularly amusing, you can't reasonably explain that refusal by saying that he probably won't agree with you about the funniness of those scenes and lines.
As I said to OLL, he's not trying to start a debate: he simply asking BCG members to identify the bits they find particularly funny in order that he might better understand how to write a commissionable sitcom in 2019.
The only reasonable reason (do you see what I did there?) for somebody to refuse to identify any such funny bits is that he/she doesn't have the time or the inclination to help him.
Having checked out the professional reviews, I can't find a single reviewer who doesn't think "Ghosts" is a thoroughly commendable sitcom. Surely, therefore, there must be plenty of funny bits?
You have absolutely nothing to lose by helping him. If he disagrees with you about the funniness of the bits you choose, so what? Comedy is subjective.
Quote: Sitcomfan64 @ 17th May 2019, 11:17 PMWhy though? Genuinely. An out of context quote posted here I find funny isn't going to make you laugh any more than in the context of the show. If you dislike it so much then why put yourself through watching it at all? There are a million and one other things to watch!
Sorry, I have little formal education and at times I struggle to make myself understood; I even feel slightly intimidated when posting on BCG.
To further what Rood Eye kindly says, I'm trying to understand the methodology behind today's commissioning process. A fools errand?
I believe this may assist me in trying to assimilate a better suited writing style currently required.
Whether it will make me a better writer is extremely questionable! But that's not the point.
Whilst thus far I have found Ghosts to be unfunny that doesn't make it so.
If I can gain even a slight comprehension as to what 'works' in Ghosts then maybe it will help me. Maybe not.
Thanks anyway.
Quote: garyd @ 18th May 2019, 12:33 AMSorry, I have little formal education and at times I struggle to make myself understood; I even feel slightly intimidated when posting on BCG.
Please, don't feel like that.
I have often wondered if some people are afraid or intimidated to post because of a misconceived perception that other posters are mightier and might mock what you write.
Post and be damned 
Quote: garyd @ 18th May 2019, 12:33 AMI'm trying to understand the methodology behind today's commissioning process. A fools errand?
I believe this may assist me in trying to assimilate a better suited writing style currently required.
Whether it will make me a better writer is extremely questionable! But that's not the point.
...
If I can gain even a slight comprehension as to what 'works' in Ghosts then maybe it will help me. Maybe not.
Yes - it really is a fools errand.
Commissioners are reacting to many factors - the past, fear of losing their job, second-guessing what the next big thing is, copying what another channel has had success with - rarely is it gut-feel as to what might make great comedy.
The only thing you can be sure of is that between the time of you having idea and it being in any shape to present, EVERYTHING will have changed - including the Commissioning Editor.
So don't bother.
And you're right, it won't make you a better writer. Only writing does that.
Don't try to write stuff that's a bit better than some of the shit you see commissioned.
Try to write stuff that's nearly as good as the best.
Quote: Lazzard @ 18th May 2019, 9:24 AMDon't try to write stuff that's a bit better than some of the shit you see commissioned.
Try to write stuff that's nearly as good as the best.
Wise words, to which I would add that even if you submit the most brilliant sitcom script in the history of television, it will very probably be tossed into the nearest bin if the characters are not:
50% women - at least!
15% non-Caucasian - at least!
8% disabled - at least!
8% LGBT - at least!
When I say "characters", the inclusion of the above percentages of the above characters in any capacity will render your script worthy of consideration but, if you want your script to be considered seriously, those characters really need to be in leading roles.
Don't worry about the inappropriateness of certain characters being in certain roles: if your sitcom is based upon the ups and downs of a premiership football team on the road to the FA Cup final, it is absolutely essential that at least six of the players are women, at least two of the players are non-Caucasian, at least one of them is visibly disabled and at least one of them is openly gay.
"Ghosts" may not have much going for it, comedically speaking, but it sure as hell is inclusive!
Quote: Rood Eye @ 18th May 2019, 9:58 AMWise words, to which I would add that even if you submit the most brilliant sitcom script in the history of television, it will very probably be tossed into the nearest bin if the characters are not:
50% women - at least!
15% non-Caucasian - at least!
8% disabled - at least!
8% LGBT - at least!
When I say "characters", the inclusion of the above percentages of the above characters in any capacity will render your script worthy of consideration but, if you want your script to be considered seriously, those characters really need to be in leading roles.
Don't worry about the inappropriateness of certain characters being in certain roles: if your sitcom is based upon the ups and downs of a premiership football team on the road to the FA Cup final, it is absolutely essential that at least six of the players are women, at least two of the players are non-Caucasian, at least one of them is visibly disabled and at least one of them is openly gay.
"Ghosts" may not have much going for it, comedically speaking, but it sure as hell is inclusive!
I know where you're coming from - but the truth is if it's funny and is a bit low on the diversity scale they'll probably ask you to address it. The FA Cup comedy you suggest could easily have all those groups - in fact it would be odd if it didn't.
Also bear in mind it's any easy non-negotiable rejection to say it not diverse - much easier than saying you think it's a bit shit.
I doubt genuinely good stuff is being rejected on these grounds.
The trouble starts when people try to second-guess commissioners by putting all these box-ticking elements in, before they've even made it funny.
Ghosts is fine for what it is.
The misjudgment is pitching it as a mainstream comedy rather than for kids.
Thanks for the responses!
They're much appreciated.
So, I am going to give episode 6 of Ghosts a miss as I appear to be flogging a dead horse.
Aha!
So, it's not that inclusive, then.
What about an animal ghost!
Quote: garyd @ 18th May 2019, 12:32 PMWhat about an animal ghost!
If an animal ghost does appear in the final episode, I bet a pound to a penny it's a black labrador!
Quote: Rood Eye @ 18th May 2019, 12:38 PMIf an animal ghost does appear in the final episode, I bet a pound to a penny it's a black labrador!
Or a cat.
But one that identifies as a dog.