James Bond Scene Page 2

You can argue over individual lines or shots until the cows come home (and expect you to have hoovered..) the main thing to me is that the overall effect is "right" - which it is.

The individual lines might get changed around over time and deciding if one line is better than another when the gags are similar is quite subjective. Whether a shot of a timepiece is going to work or not (I think it would work as it's a classic James Bond shot..) wouldn't really be down to the writer, isn't it more a call for the director? I'd have quite a long lingering shot on the kids timepiece which would make the original line work and it is my favourite above the alternatives tried! (Subjectively!)

I must admit it seemed more like a sketch to me not a sitcom but of course it could be characters in a sitcom if you want it to be. Why not?

M Lewis: I reckon some of the advice you're being given is too specific, i.e. change a word, change a gag. It's very subjective mate and one man's meat.. go with what YOU feel works and only change something when you're absoloutely sure it really does improve it. In the main, only listen to what professional editors, commissioners, producers have to say about your work if you're going to change anything you don't particularly agree with/can't see the need to.

Just a thought geezer! ..and of course, it's just the opinion of an amateur writer/film maker.

Thanks for your input, Seefacts.

I'm sure M Lewis will treat your views with the respect they deserve.

Frankie makes a number of very good points.

At the end of the day, a writer must, indeed, decide for himself whether or not to change something as a result of advice received.

Quote: Seefacts @ February 5, 2008, 1:05 PM

So wrong it hurts like nuclear piles.
I got an invite to the BBC at 20.
Look at Linehan and Mathews's work, and how old they were.

View original

Not much of a counter-argument.
Mathews was 30+ when he did anything. And you were on Crackerjack!

Any decent list of best sitcoms is predominantly (90+%)written by people who were ineligible for 18-30 holidays.

I thought it was good initially, but like Chimes I thought the kid from 1985 line sounded a bit artificial - but it's not really worth stressing over. IMO everyone will have their own way to rewrite things at the level that's being displayed here - and if they can, any way along the process, I'm guessing they'll try to! Some slight reworking can make things better, some is just "tinkering". Too much reworking and toing and froing can lead to a jumble where you don't know what's what in your head any more. I'll often have a tinker and come back to a script a few weeks later and change it right back again.

But then, scripts are a fluid and alive medium.

Quote: JohnnyD @ February 5, 2008, 3:17 PM

Not much of a counter-argument.
Mathews was 30+ when he did anything. And you were on Crackerjack!

Any decent list of best sitcoms is predominantly (90+%)written by people who were ineligible for 18-30 holidays.

View original

Linehan was 24 - I always forget he's a lot younger than Mathews.

Ricahrd Curtis wrote the 1st series of BlackAdder at 27.

I think it's more down to the fact the industry is changing and over the next 10 years you'll find most writers will be in their mid-20s.

Quote: Seefacts @ February 5, 2008, 3:46 PM

.. over the next 10 years you'll find most writers will be in their mid-20s.

View original

I don't think that will be the case for sitcoms. You probably need a bit too much world-weariness to be a good sitcom writer. But we shall see.

Quote: Seefacts @ February 5, 2008, 3:46 PM

. . . over the next 10 years you'll find most writers will be in their mid-20s.

View original

So any writer not currently at school will be pretty-much unemployable in ten years time?

I doubt it.

Oh, and M. Lewis, I liked the original piece.

don't think it makes too much difference as to a writer's age although a 34 year old linehan is arguably a better writer than a 24 year linehan. both are/ were pretty good. and 'world weariness' is perhaps more aplicable to what type of writer one is. type writers, for instance, do not improve with age. seriously though, gervais and merchant would not have have made such a good Office had they been in their early 20s IMHO

Quote: Chimes of Freedom @ February 5, 2008, 4:07 PM

So any writer not currently at school will be pretty-much unemployable in ten years time?

I doubt it.

View original

Yes, that's what I meant.

Yes. That's exactly it.

I particularly liked all the JBs. Maybe, James Brown could get a mention (somehow).

DELETED by Frankie...

No point arguing about nothing!

I'm learning AT LAST!

Quote: JohnnyD @ February 5, 2008, 4:11 PM

Oh, and M. Lewis, I liked the original piece.

View original

good, back on track

Hi M

Read this thread with interest.

First off I like the extract / sketch. It flows well and has enough humour to keep me with it.

Once you get to the finer points of "change a word here" or "lose another there" then I believe that as Frankie (I think) suggests, that should be your own call.

We all speak differently and have idiomatic phrases and ways of constructing sentences. If I ask for an 'em sendwich or a round of ham, in both cases I'm likely to get two pieces of some sort of bread with ham between them. Not unless we are in a plumbing supplies shop that is.

Both have achieved the result I wished for and I would argue neither one could be deemed to have been more effective or indeed better than the other.

It's true that some phrases can look and sound clunky in a first draft and by and large those are the ones that require an edit. The rest IMHO is kinda window dressing really.

I certainly feel that as the writer I know what I’m trying to say and how I want to set it up and therefore I feel that I would want to make any corrections myself. Other peoples’ interpretations on your work are simply just that.

That’s not to say that others can’t improve our work but this discussion to me seemed more about semantics than changing actual meanings. A commissioning editor would get the drift of your piece straight off the bat and if he liked it would then discuss changes with YOU