If you don't have a writer the actors don't have anything to say - surely?
How Important Is The Writer? Page 2
There would be no story to tell. No idea, nothing!
Quote: johnny roulette @ May 29, 2007, 9:44 PMhello
this is my first post so please be kind.
i think the writer is crucial.
other aspects are important such as casting, performance, music, direction, editing etc but ultimately if the script is poor then none of the these can save the show. if the script is great then the other things can all contribute to making a great sitcom.
whilst its not my favourite sitcom, THE OFFICE is a beautifully crafted piece of television. if you read the scripts then they are just as funny as the show itself, if not funnier in my opinion.cheers
Hi Johnny, Welcome.
Probably best you don’t look at my thoughts on the recent BBC3 pilots but just took a look at your profile and www.wheretomate.co.uk and like what I saw, great chose of likes and IMHO most of the best recent comedies have been Manchester based so will look forward to your Pilot.
Didn't really read Barry's question properly - sorry Barry! He asked for a percentage. I would say 70% for the writer in a 'great sitcom' I think we all appreciate how much the production can raise and dampen proceedings, and nothing torpedoes a good script faster than bad acting.
Incidently, someone mentioned the Office scripts reading as well as the show. I don't know if it's been mentioned, but the published scripts are actually transcripts of the show rather than the original scripts, so that's why they actually exactly resemble the shows. It would be interesting to look at the actual scripts to see how they differed and how much was scrapped and improvised etc..
Maybe someone on here has one, or has seen one?
Hi Johnny welcome to BSG. Well done on getting commisioned, be sure to tell us when its on so we can boost the ratings 
Quote: Godot Taxis @ May 29, 2007, 11:52 PMDidn't really read Barry's question properly - sorry Barry! He asked for a percentage.
No - I didn't either. Just read the headlines and jump to conclusions. You can tell I read the Sun - or at least look at the pictures.
OK - not being an expert but I would have thought about 70%. You need the material to start with and then directors actors etc to bring it to life.
But then who am I to comment?
Lots of interesting opinion but here is a fact. The writer is the only originating artist in the whole process. Everyone else is an interpretive artist. You can't give a director 30 blank pages and say off you go, can you?
There is no doubt that the director and actors can make or break your script but if no one writes it what are the rest going to do?
Also, as you've witnessed, there are more decent actors and directors out there than decent scripts. I think 70% is a minimum.
If we're talking about writer driven sitcoms, as opposed to writer-performer shows, then I'm afraid to say the writer doesn't seem to be very important. One of the interesting trends in the last ten to fifteen years is how poorly writer driven shows have performed. The really big hits seem to be writer-performer driven. Which leads me to suspect comedy departments have lost the ability to take good scripts and transform them into winning shows.
It's interesting to contrast this with drama, which seems to treat the writer as paramount, and all the big hits of recent years in drama have been solely writer driven.
Initially, probably the writer, but as the sitcom gains momentum the writer will write to the idiosynchrasies of the actor(s) involved so it becomes more collaborative. However, a good actor will bring the role alive. As a writer you have the character in your head but it is *very* difficult to convey said character to anyone else. A good actor will understand the character from the script and interpret your thoughts to everyone around. Case in point, Coming of Age last week: good script if you listened through the characters talking but actors overacting seemed to ruin it a bit.
But, in essence, no writer --> no source material so they're the one vital cog in the chain. One actor might be a perfect fit for a character but at the end of the day, any actor could play the part if the script exists.
A word for editing. There are a few episodes of Friends about (I think first season DVDs) where if you watch the 'extended' version, you really how important good editing is between scenes. The 'extended' version scenes seem to wet-fart out and it ruins the dynamics of the show. Watch the two versions and you'll see what I mean. Point being, good editors are vital!
Dan
Equal. If it's a good script, but the production, actors, etc etc etc, are shite, then the whole show is going to be bollocks. And vice versa; no matter how good the production, actors, etc etc etc may be, you can't polish a turd.
Of course, if we're just going on the existence of each 'cog' in the whole machine, then I suppose the writer; without whom there wouldn't be a show to be able to f**k up.
Quote: chipolata @ May 30, 2007, 10:33 AMIf we're talking about writer driven sitcoms, as opposed to writer-performer shows, then I'm afraid to say the writer doesn't seem to be very important. One of the interesting trends in the last ten to fifteen years is how poorly writer driven shows have performed. The really big hits seem to be writer-performer driven. Which leads me to suspect comedy departments have lost the ability to take good scripts and transform them into winning shows.
This is a really good point in my view. Most recent shows have the writer IN them. Gavin & Stacey and Pulling are a case in point. If you think of The Office, you have the writers perfoming, producing and directing as well as appearing. A lot different say, to Father Ted for example.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ May 30, 2007, 5:07 PMThis is a really good point in my view. Most recent shows have the writer IN them. Gavin & Stacey and Pulling are a case in point. If you think of The Office, you have the writers perfoming, producing and directing as well as appearing. A lot different say, to Father Ted for example.
Yes... it is a good point. In fact if you look at the bios of the actors & actresses involved in recent sitcoms, invariably they are listed as '... a very talented writer and actor'. Almost a pre-requisite these days perhaps?
I'm not sure if the resulting character-led shows are an intentional direction in terms of output as a whole but it's obviously easier for actors (even those who haven't really done a lot) with their proverbial feet already in the door to pitch something, in an attempt to stay in employment.
it is a good point with recent sitcoms. Add Royale Family, Pheonix Nights and Early Doors to the list. But there is still Green Wing, Worst Week of My Life, My Family that are written by writers only.
So should i say i'm going to star in it too to get it commissioned?
Quote: swerytd @ May 30, 2007, 12:17 PMA word for editing. There are a few episodes of Friends about (I think first season DVDs) where if you watch the 'extended' version, you really how important good editing is between scenes. The 'extended' version scenes seem to wet-fart out and it ruins the dynamics of the show. Watch the two versions and you'll see what I mean. Point being, good editors are vital!
Dan
What did they do? Edit it down to about 2 minutes?
Quote: swerytd @ May 30, 2007, 12:17 PMPoint being, good editors are vital!
My girlfriend will love you for that. (Well not literally.) She's an editor.