BSG Dogma

Any one remember Dogma, when a collection of Nordic film makers took a cinematic oath of purity. Too only produce films with naturalistic light, sound etc. As a way of reexploring their cinematic craft.

Having looked at many comments on pilots in critique that focus on young lads/flathshares/ offices etc. I thought why don't we try it.

Whose upfor it?

My initial rules.

1 No flatshares.
2 No more than 1 male character aged 16-45
3 No office work setting.
4 At least one central female character.
5 No stereotypes based on sexuality, or race.
6 Must have an observable relation between 2 main characters that in none sexual.
7 Must have an observable plot that devleops over length of episode.
8 No more than 10 gags, all other humour to come from character relationship.

I'd say 5-10 pages to make it readable.

I think this could be fun.

It was Dogme.

I saw two films done by the Dogme standard. 'Idiots' which was pretty good and 'Festen' which was really good, but quite depressing.

was idiots the naked one?

Quote: sootyj @ June 27 2008, 1:47 PM BST

My initial rules.

1 No flatshares.
2 No more than 1 male character aged 16-45
3 No office work setting.
4 At least one central female character.
5 No stereotypes based on sexuality, or race.
6 Must have an observable relation between 2 main characters that in none sexual.
7 Must have an observable plot that devleops over length of episode.
8 No more than 10 gags, all other humour to come from character relationship.

View original

I'm working on a pilot now that I think (perhaps with the exception of rule 8) conforms to all these rules.

Quote: sootyj @ June 27 2008, 1:47 PM BST

8 No more than 10 gags, all other humour to come from character relationship.

View original

Could you give some examples of what you mean by this?

Hmmm. The very vague idea I have hits most of those apart from number 2 as there are 2 guys and 2 women in it. Mind you, one of those guys might be a minor character compared to the other 3.

Quote: sootyj @ June 27 2008, 1:47 PM BST

Any one remember Dogma, when a collection of Nordic film makers took a cinematic oath of purity. Too only produce films with naturalistic light, sound etc. As a way of reexploring their cinematic craft.

Having looked at many comments on pilots in critique that focus on young lads/flathshares/ offices etc. I thought why don't we try it.

Whose upfor it?

My initial rules.

1 No flatshares.
2 No more than 1 male character aged 16-45
3 No office work setting.
4 At least one central female character.
5 No stereotypes based on sexuality, or race.
6 Must have an observable relation between 2 main characters that in none sexual.
7 Must have an observable plot that devleops over length of episode.
8 No more than 10 gags, all other humour to come from character relationship.

I'd say 5-10 pages to make it readable.

I think this could be fun.

View original

If this was a fishing forum the above post would read as follows:

1. No swimming in the river while you fish.
2. No use of kitkats as bait.
3. Tesco Finest Haddock doesnt count
4. Only use a rod and line (no explosives - you know who you are)

etc, etc!

In other words...arent the good writers aware of those pitfalls already and writing accordingly?

Quote: Marc P @ June 27 2008, 2:04 PM BST

Could you give some examples of what you mean by this?

View original

Ok gag, Black Adder "A stickier situation than when sticky the sitkcy insect got stuck on a particularly sticky bun"

Character/plot gag when in Peep Show, Jezz spends the whole episode trying to remember the bad thing.

It wouldn't have been funny, with out investment, and understnading of the character. As such it is part of a bigger over all joke covering the whole series.

Quote: Pete @ June 27 2008, 2:45 PM BST

If this was a fishing forum the above post would read as follows:

1. No swimming in the river while you fish.
2. No use of kitkats as bait.
3. Tesco Finest Haddock doesnt count
4. Only use a rod and line (no explosives - you know who you are)

etc, etc!

In other words...arent the good writers aware of those pitfalls already and writing accordingly?

View original

Nope. I based this on comments that kept coming up in sitcom critique. I suppose I viewed it as a way, we could all move our writing forward, together as one.

A kind of Maoist great leap forward for comedy writing.

I saw some Dogme films, loved Festen, Idiots meh..

But seriously I think this could be an interesting exercise, and for me at least a challenge.

Might even be fun.

I think it's an idea with potental. Number 2 seems more like a joke than a serious restriction though.

Well it's rather poe faced, and based on looking at sitcom feedback.
May be soften a little,

2 Must be more main characters than 2 males aged 16-30.

Is that better?

Quote: sootyj @ June 27 2008, 3:31 PM BST

Well it's rather poe faced, and based on looking at sitcom feedback.
May be soften a little,

2 Must be more main characters than 2 males aged 16-30.

Is that better?

View original

A little confusing I think. How about:

The two main characters cannot be male 16-30

After all, it's the 'two guys in a shop' template we're trying to avoid isn't it?

Quote: Pete @ June 27 2008, 2:45 PM BST

arent the good writers aware of those pitfalls already and writing accordingly?

View original

All the great sitcoms breach at least one of Sooty's rules. And all of those rules have been broken by at least on great sitcom. The point being that they were written by 'good writers'.

Me, I do not have a clue what I am doing, so the next time I attempt a sitcom I shall attempt to observe Sooty's rules.

I'd post something but I hate the formatting. Maybe the new site will have a files sections where scripts can be posted in proper layout init.

[quote name="Timbo" post="192037" date="June 27 2008, 3:46 PM BST"]All the great sitcoms breach at least one of Sooty's rules. And all of those rules have been broken by at least on great sitcom. The point being that they were written by 'good writers'.

This was purely as a response repeated themes in the critique threads.

I find it useful to write against an artificial challenge, especially ones that challenge what I'm not so good at.

I mean I reckon my self, if I can learn to write characters outside my comfort zone, it may be easier when I try the ones I'm more comfortable with again.

Any one for skit dogme?

No, I took your point Sooty. My post was in response to Pete, who I felt hadn't.