Getting on the inside Page 3

Quote: Tom Pk @ July 20, 2007, 1:03 AM

I think people seem to have the wrong attitude here, saying "my work is excellent, if producers reject it then they are wrong". You have to see your own flaws and re-draft and re-work. If you are getting rejected then maybe your perfect script isn't so perfect. If you want a producer to take your work you have to give them what they want, and if they have rejected you then you haven't done that.

How can they be wrong? They know exactly what they want.

View original

I hope you're not talking about me. My point wasn't that my script was perfect and was being rejected, rather that it hadn't been read - by a producer or even a reader. No-one said if a producer rejects a script they are wrong – I would be inclined to listen closely to what any producer had to say about my script. Moffat introduced the idea of a perfect/smashing/terrific script as the criteria for getting on, which I still think is naive. If he submitted Jekyl, Coupling, or The Empty Child to the writersroom he would know the pain of rejection as none of them would make the sift.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ July 19, 2007, 7:43 PM

I like the way many of you called what Steven Moffat said 'Absolute Rubbish', clearly its not as it worked for him. I have also had some success by doing what he said, just writing as well as you can and bunging it in an envelope.

View original

I wish someone in the interview challenged him by saying:

"But Steven, didn't you start your career by writing for a TV show that YOUR DAD CREATED?!?!"

And he'd go "Er, yeah, actually . . ."

Most agents won't touch uncomissioned writers. As soon as a producer wants to take it further, they'll be all over you.

It's about making money, it's not about helping people for the sake of it. Unless there's a sniff of interest about you and your work, I wouldn't bother with trying to get an agent.

As for brilliant/good scripts. I don't think there are loads of 'good' scripts out there. The writer's room page used to have a forum where people would put up the sort of stuff they were pestering the BBC with - and it was mostly garbage. I'd think 'No, wonder they don't read half the shite they get sent. It wasn't even on par with the worst of their mainstream output.'

Seefacts, is that right about Moffat starting out writing for his dad's show? Seems that he could be guilty of talking about something he has no experience of – something you couldn't ever accuse anyone on this board of doing!

You're definitely right about the writersroom getting mostly garbage, but my producer contact told me that the writersroom was considered very hit and miss by her contacts inside the BBC, some of whom deal with new writers.

Look how the writersroom works, twice a month the readers come in to the office, sit down in the script room and read the first ten pages of the scripts. Those they like they take away with them, the rest go to a secretary to be posted back to the writers.

With most of those scripts, they probably only read three pages, because it's obviously very quickly when you read a script whether someone can write or not. Most of the time, The readers will have a good idea by what you've written in the covering letter what kind of writer you are, and what established writer's style or motifs you're consciously or unconsciously using.

I think I made a mistake by mentioning in my covering letter that I was long-listed in the Last Laugh competition. I think the reader thought 'Oh yeah, and now you think you can write a sitcom, do you?' I also wrote about the sex industry, and I now believe that this is a subject that is considered a no-no, hence the script does not go into the reader's bag.

Respectable on Paramount, wasn't that a sitcom based on the sex industry?

That was on 4 or 5 first.

It was on 5 - one of their first home sitcoms.

Shame it wasn't very good, and a not so good end of Harry Thompson's career.

Was it about the sex industry then?

Yeah, it was about prozzies.

It was a collaboration between 5 & Paramount but i was on Channel 5 first.

Quote: Godot Taxis @ July 20, 2007, 5:01 AM

I hope you're not talking about me. My point wasn't that my script was perfect and was being rejected, rather that it hadn't been read - by a producer or even a reader. No-one said if a producer rejects a script they are wrong – I would be inclined to listen closely to what any producer had to say about my script. Moffat introduced the idea of a perfect/smashing/terrific script as the criteria for getting on, which I still think is naive. If he submitted Jekyl, Coupling, or The Empty Child to the writersroom he would know the pain of rejection as none of them would make the sift.

View original

What?! The Empty Child was fantastic! Best who of that series, and he won a Hugo award for it!! I quite like Coupling and Jeckyl too, but Ill let that go . . . but dont diss his Who work; he somehow transcends anything hes done in the past when he writes for Who. Well, thats what I think anyway. Though I do think if he were to send out an episode of Coupling out blind to producers, someone would bite; you have to admire the structure. And it is pretty funny, if a little artificial seeming at times.

Matt, he's not Bob Holmes. The central motif of TEC - ie the boy in the gasmask asking 'are you my mummy' is pinched from from a poem.

Quote: Godot Taxis @ July 20, 2007, 9:03 PM

Matt, he's not Bob Holmes. The central motif of TEC - ie the boy in the gasmask asking 'are you my mummy' is pinched from from a poem.

View original

I disagree, all three stories hes written so far have been pretty perfect, as far as Im concerned, and I think a lot of who fans in general agree hes about the best current writer on the show; though after his two parter this series, Paul Cornell is catching up fast. And as for pinching, Who has always done that, especially in the period when Bob Holmes was involved; they always 'borrowed' from horror films and other sources, I see no shame in that. I really hope Moffat is in the frame to take the top job when Davies moves on-at least there would be no farting aliens. The odd thing is, although Moffats background is comedy, he tends to write the scariest, most sophisticated episodes of the current run; though as I said, after his Human Nature two parter, Cornell is right at his shoulder.

But anyway, this isnt a Doctor Who thread, so Ill shut up now!

Who was dissing Coupling? That is a world class sitcom, people on here only wish they could write something as cleverly structured and funny as that.

Quote: Matthew Stott @ July 20, 2007, 9:10 PM

I disagree, all three stories hes written so far have been pretty perfect, as far as Im concerned, and I think a lot of who fans in general agree hes about the best current writer on the show; though after his two parter this series, Paul Cornell is catching up fast. And as for pinching, Who has always done that, especially in the period when Bob Holmes was involved; they always 'borrowed' from horror films and other sources, I see no shame in that. I really hope Moffat is in the frame to take the top job when Davies moves on-at least there would be no farting aliens. The odd thing is, although Moffats background is comedy, he tends to write the scariest, most sophisticated episodes of the current run; though as I said, after his Human Nature two parter, Cornell is right at his shoulder.

But anyway, this isnt a Doctor Who thread, so Ill shut up now!

View original

I'd like to talk about this!

You're right, Bob Holmes borrowed like there was no tomorrow, but the gasmark asking 'are you my mummy' is a pretty major borrowing, since it is the central image of the story and generates much of the horror. I was also put off by the girl asking 'to use the bathroom'. This wouldn't have mattered so much if Moffat hadn't banged on about the reseach he had done on Confidential. He must have grown up on Skaro not to have know that many ordinary households in wartime had outside lavatories and tin baths, and in the households that did have bathrooms, this would not have been used as a euphemism for going to the toilet - one would have been more likely to say ‘where’s the privvy’ or ‘can I use the loo/lavatory/toilet’.

Anyway, I know enough about you to know that these things wouldn't bother you, so I'll shut up!

What's you favourite stuff from the pre-Russel era, by the way?

Quote: Jeremy Smith @ July 20, 2007, 9:18 PM

Who was dissing Coupling? That is a world class sitcom, people on here only wish they could write something as cleverly structured and funny as that.

View original

Structured well, yes, but it made up for the fact it wasn't totally funny.

The characters were a bit bland, and although it did have lots of good lines, it was no classic.

And Chalk was rubbish.