Thanks, it'll certianly be interesting what comes out I reckon.
BSG Dogma Page 2
Quote: Timbo @ June 27 2008, 5:14 PM BSTNo, I took your point Sooty. My post was in response to Pete, who I felt hadn't.
i got his point - mine was that anyone writing a sitcom should know such basics from 30 secs of research you could conduct by googling "how to write a sitcom" - to be honest, if you've got as far as writing something and you're falling fowl off such issues you probably lack the talent to succed.
let's not mess about, thousands want to write sitcoms...this place is like a comdey X factor......when someone sings for simon cowell and he needs to give them pointers on the basics you know they are never going to be in the final! (of course cowell doesnt give pointers on basics....he says "you're shit" and they leave in tears)
WHat on earth are you on about Pete? Of his exclusions/rules
5 No stereotypes based on sexuality, or race.
7 Must have an observable plot that devleops over length of episode.
Only these would be 'basics' as you might call them.
I really don't understand your attitude. There are no basics, and certainly none worth knowing that you can learn in 30 secs of surfing the net. Any rule you care to lay down can be, and has been, broken. The trick is knowing how. You sometimes have to fall foul of the rules in order to understand them. Then once you understand them you can work out how to break them without getting caught.
As for this being the comdey X-factor. Actually no. The bad contestants on the X-factor are funny.
Sitcom, perhaps more than most disciplines, is about channelling talent through craft. I posted a sitcom script in Critique. I knew it had some merit (from professional feedback I had had in the past) but I knew there were problems. The feedback I received was very useful in clarifying my thinking. Which is why we have the Critique forum. A lot of those who post sitcom scripts are very young. Hopefully they will learn from their failures.
'Hopefully they will learn from their failures. '
As Nietszche said ... 'that which does not kill us is still bloody painful.'
I'm feeling a little raw myself today, but it has been worth it. Got to say I am glad it was old script I posted and not something I was currently working on...
Quote: Marc P @ June 27 2008, 5:41 PM BSTWHat on earth are you on about Pete? Of his exclusions/rules
They're basics (in the sense of things you would learn from a moments research and things that would occur to you naturally as someone who can tell stories)
In my opinion, anyone stumbling over these having already felt ready to start writing a script is as unlikely to succeed as someone laughed of X factor who then goes and gets singing lessons.
Well I am still confused, and please be specific here, what have you learned from your moments research and how does that relate to your man's rules for a little online exercise/game.
What is wrong with all the other rules that you think is wrong?
Quote: Pete @ June 27 2008, 8:34 PM BSTThey're basics (in the sense of things you would learn from a moments research and things that would occur to you naturally as someone who can tell stories)
In my opinion, anyone stumbling over these having already felt ready to start writing a script is as unlikely to succeed as someone laughed of X factor who then goes and gets singing lessons.
1 No flatshares. Man About The House, Men Behaving Badly
2 No more than 1 male character aged 16-45 The Likely Lads, Peep Show
3 No office work setting. The Squirrels, The Smoking Room
4 At least one central female character. Porridge, Steptoe & Son
5 No stereotypes based on sexuality, or race. It Aint Half Hot Mum, Gimme Gimme
6 Must have an observable relation between 2 main characters that in none sexual. The Lovers, Terry and June
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. Shelley, Not Going Out
The only basic rule is 7, and skilled writers have repeatedly stretched it to breaking point. e.g. Porridge "A Night In".
Sooty's challenge was to an extent about avoiding proven formulas.
I'm with you Timbo, but his point wasn't about avoiding winning formulas just about similarities about ideas that had been posted recently.
Quote: Timbo @ June 27 2008, 9:18 PM BST1 No flatshares. Man About The House, Men Behaving Badly
2 No more than 1 male character aged 16-45 The Likely Lads, Peep Show
3 No office work setting. The Squirrels, The Smoking Room
4 At least one central female character. Porridge, Steptoe & Son
5 No stereotypes based on sexuality, or race. It Aint Half Hot Mum, Gimme Gimme
6 Must have an observable relation between 2 main characters that in none sexual. The Lovers, Terry and June
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. Shelley, Not Going OutThe only basic rule is 7, and skilled writers have repeatedly stretched it to breaking point. e.g. Porridge "A Night In".
Sooty's challenge was to an extent about avoiding proven formulas.
not my point - any highly skilled writer will not give two hoots about the list (as your exmples show) - but a higly skilled writer wont need the exercise.
Are you a highly skilled writer then Pete?
Quote: Marc P @ June 27 2008, 9:24 PM BSTI'm with you Timbo, but his point wasn't about avoiding winning formulas just about similarities about ideas that had been posted recently.
Yes, you are right. But people tend to imitate what is successful, so in a roundabout way...
If I do have another go at a sitcom script I think I will try to follow Sooty's rules. Not, as we (and no doubt Sooty) agree they are essential to good sitcom, but because they will make my work stand out from everyone else's. Then when I am an award winning comedy writer I am going to write a sitcom about two young office clerks who spend all day in their flat aimlessly bantering about their gay Pakistani neighbour and lusting after the fit bird who lives across the hall, who we never see.
Quote: Marc P @ June 27 2008, 9:38 PM BSTAre you a highly skilled writer then Pete?
It's a tricky one as the answer that springs to mind is yes. However, i don't mean to imply that i don't have huge room for improvement, more that i am a long way above the norm.
I think Norm's spoof news pieces are very good actually.