Doing it ourselves? Page 4

Quote: Skibbington von Skubber @ December 20, 2007, 12:04 PM

Is that exactly what the Beeb told them? Or is it an extrapolation?

I find it extremely difficult to believe.

Something either kicks ass or it doesn't. The names of the writers means didly dick. Most of the audience doesn't care and wouldn't know who wrote it if you asked them 10 minutes after the end of the show.

Now maybe the Beeb DID spell it out and reject their stuff due to anonymity, but it sounds preposterous and disgusting if true.

View original

Believe it!

You or I my may have this attitude, but the Beeb clearly doesn't (or at least didn't). And it doesn't seem that preposterous to me.

They were given a few commissions with the News Huddlines so they could become a bit more established, but in the end it was taking up too much of their time (and it cost them a lot to buy all the newspapers for research, apparently! Before web-based news was properly established, I suppose...)

Quote: Skibbington von Skubber @ December 20, 2007, 12:19 PM

As for the topic of this thread:

I am glad you brought it up even though you anticipated some criticism.

Frankie Rage made the excellent point about how difficult it is to even get 5 people to show up at the same time and place, much less over & over again.

I think what is needed is a new television channel for amateur productions, but the cost for that will run into the millions. So instead there is Youtube...

Why doesn't BSG have its own Youtube account?

Peeps could submit their vids to this central location and contests could be held.

Right now we have a little network of peeps who have their own Youtube channels (Slag Bros, etc)...but I think a centralized location would gain more exposure.

Exposure.

Audience.

Reputations built.

BSG @ Youtube becomes the focus of various tv production companies and their scouts.

Writer and producers and actors buzz around the BSG hub. The likeminded gravitate to one another and form teams.

Eventually we turn pro...and all because of BSG @ Youtube.

Hmmmm????

View original

I like the sound of this.

I like it but we're back to the question, who will judge the vids? If it's going to have the BSG tag then Aaron and Mark who basically set up the site [at least that's the impression I get]would have to have a say. It's their acorn after all. If we made it an annual membership to be paid on a certain date that would keep funding running and would allow for a turnover of writers. People who didn't get their stuff performed could opt out if wanted and nubiles would come in. Of course we'd have to build a reputation [but every reputation starts from zilch] to get new writers interested. But we're interested so why shouldn't others of our ilk be interested too.

Quote: roscoff @ December 20, 2007, 2:36 PM

If you're going to have a situation where people are uploading their stuff adhoc is there going to be any quality control. After all you're not just representing yourself now, you're representing a group of people. Too much trash and it will die on it's feet.

View original

Yes there would be quality control. Scripts would be uploaded, but they wouldn't be available to view. There would have to be an initial group that sorts the scripts into a final 10/12/15. At this point the finalists would be put online and people could then vote in a 10,8,6,5,4,3,2,1 point manner (Bit like Eurovision). The Top 4/5 scripts would then be take part in a filmed read through which would then be put online for the final vote.

I think I should write a FAQ.

Quote: roscoff @ December 20, 2007, 2:36 PM

I like it but we're back to the question, who will judge the vids? If it's going to have the BSG tag then Aaron and Mark who basically set up the site (at least that's the impression I get) would have to have a say. It's their acorn after all. If we made it an annual membership to be paid on a certain date that would keep funding running and would allow for a turnover of writers. People who didn't get their stuff performed could opt out if wanted and nubiles would come in. Of course we'd have to build a reputation (but every reputation starts from zilch) to get new writers interested. But we're interested so why shouldn't others of our ilk be interested too.

View original

I was thinking just have an open submission thing, much like the forum. The most it would need is a bit of moderation, say. Just a hub for people who can already upload filmed material. Don't like the idea of a subscription fee or anything. I don't think it's too much to ask for writers who are at all serious to get a video camera somewhere along the line and write something they are able to film. No committees, no fees, no hassle, no anything, just somewhere where people can upload stuff for an audience. Don't see it has to be too hard - maybe a low-tech version of comedy box making more use of YouTube. If there was a rating or 'most viewed' system the shit ought to sink without any censoring hassle.

I think Rob your working hard here proving your idea to the likes of me. I think your idea is pretty damned good. Ok less of the third degree lets get some names and see where we go.

I'm also one of the people who misread this as being a sketch show rather then a sitcom. I really think a sketch show is the way to go to maximise people's interest.

And as for Skubber's idea, I think a BSG YouTube account is great idea. If nothing else it could broaden our idea of the resources and talent we have at our disposal.

Quote: David Bussell @ December 20, 2007, 4:21 PM

I'm also one of the people who misread this as being a sketch show rather then a sitcom. I really think a sketch show is the way to go to maximise people's interest.

And as for Skubber's idea, I think a BSG YouTube account is great idea. If nothing else it could boraden our idea of the resources and talent we have at our disposal.

View original

The point I made earlier is about a sketch show being more of everything. More locations, more props, more time and more money etc. Any filming outdoors is a very costly and potentially challenging (A closed set is so much easier). Catch an old lady crossing the road in the corner of one frame and without her permssion you'd never get it shown on TV. Not to mention shooting permits, health and safety etc. Fine if you plan to stick it on YouTube, but a reputable TV company would touch it. I don't know how many sketches you'd get, but I doubt after the restrictions of budget you'd get 15 or 20 good enough for TV, and they might all start to feel a bit samey.
A sitcom is also a unique entity from the rest. Sorry to say but there are 1000's of good and not so good sketches on Youtube, but as far as I know not one decently produced and acted 30 minute sitcom. That's its selling point and a unique selling point I think might appeal to marketing etc. What it wouldn't be admitedly is springboard for 6 or 7 writers to showcase 1 or 2 sketches, but a great showcase for 1.

Saying that I see no reason why if this were successful or failed for a avoidable reason that this couldn't also be tried

Well, we are now talking about 2 different projects, aren't we, each with their own mixed bag of boons and bugaboos. Perhaps we should have a seperate thread for any sketch/YouTube stuff as it really doesn't apply to what Rob's talking about here.

I agree. Let's let one of the site's creators set that up, pending their interest in such a venture.

BTW Dave, *completely* off-topic, I happened across your 'Gay or European' piece and thought it was very funny! Nice one.

The way MyFC works is that the membership votes, so couldn't they vote to decide whether to invest the membership funds on a sitcom or a sketch show? This is likely very different from Rob's original vision, but I like the idea of an online cooperative of actors, filmmakers and writers all adding funds to a community pot and using the resources available to get the best stuff made.

Maybe a writer would write a script or pitch with a 'need' list, of money and talent, and the ones with enough votes get the go ahead. And if any projects make money (unlikely I know!) it goes back in the kitty. I imagine that all kinds of creative folks might want to invest in a project like this, not just those with a comedy interest, but like I said it's a long way from the original sitcom competition idea!

Probably just a pie in the sky kind of idea, but pie in the sky goes quite nicely with my morning coffee. :-)

What about buying the various positions within the production?

Someone exec produces - probably the OP who's idea it was - then you set up a structure. A producer, a director, a writer, a number of camera men etc and you put a price on each.

Hold a competition for the script, the winner is chosen by all the members (the rest made up from just putting into the pot for a share and a vote) Or a share in the production company? That could be an incentive.

If you have a few good scripts then, as long as they're similar in style, you could put together a small writing team to script edit.

Sorry Seefacts I can't see this at all. Buying a position? I suppose ok if you've got the bucks but actually in principle and in money terms I wouldn't be a part of this. The idea of everyone contributing the same means there is no bias towards the more well off. I'd like to think that is the way forward.

Quote: roscoff @ December 21, 2007, 11:52 AM

Sorry Seefacts I can't see this at all. Buying a position? I suppose ok if you've got the bucks but actually in principle and in money terms I wouldn't be a part of this. The idea of everyone contributing the same means there is no bias towards the more well off. I'd like to think that is the way forward.

View original

Yeah, I see your point there.

Then perhaps a production company needs to be set up and people buy shares in that. Set a small share price and people buy however much they can afford. Once every share is sold and the right amount of money raised to make a production they go from there.

It's just picking a crew/actors and a script that would prove difficult.

Maybe, as I said, run a competition with the members voting (though if someone owns more shares than another, that could cause problems) then put together a writing team.

Just thinking out loud there.

Okay this is how I see it working. Primarilly this covers the inital budget and competition in more detail. The later stages would be for an executive to decide.

----

The makemysitcom.co.uk website would go live. Initially this website would look for shareholders in the sitcom project. One person could pledge to buy one share only for a price of 45 pounds. The target total would be 8 thousand pounds. (This pledged money would only be requested once the 8k total was reached)

Only if the pledges reach that target would the project move forward from here. At this time a "Production Executive" of 5,6 or 7 would be setup some taken from shareholders, plus one or two known identities. Effectively these would be a group that effectively work as the project producers and consultants.

Once the production executive is finalised the collection of those 45 pound pledges would begin. Also at this time the Sitcom competition would begin, and would run for approximately 2 months. Each entry would cost 10 pounds. Hopefully by the time the competition ends (given the writer contributions, and the hopefully extra shareholders that would have joined) the total buget would be a good percentage higher than initial 8 thousand. Also note that a writer would have no vote unless they became a shareholder.

Once the competition closed the production executive would begin to judge the scripts. How this is handled would depend on the amount of entries. Eventually the scripts would be reduced down to 10/12 finalists. These finalists would then be sent to an established writer/critiquer who would give a short review of each to help the shareholders vote (Think Simon Cowell, but hopefully nicer). These finalists would then be put online with review along with a forum so that shareholders could discuss and make a better informed decision. The voting would work on a 10,8,6,4,3,2,1 point scoring system. The top 4 highest scoring scripts would go through.

The top 4 scripts will be part of a filmed read-through with actors. This will be available online for all shareholders to view, and will give a better visual indication of the script than written. Might even help pinpoint issues. The vote would the take place again down to the final 2. At this point the two finalists would be asked to outline future episodes. Then a final vote. This would be done so that in effect a majority would have voted for the winning script.

(A point on the voting, and to make sure people know its above board. Voting would not be live as this could sway opinion, become tatical etc. Each person when they become a shareholder will recieve a unique key/number. Once the voting result is released each script will have the votes cast with the unique key and points awarded shown. Therefore you'll know that the 10 ,8 ,6 ,4, 3, 2, 1 points were awarded too the scripts you chose without anyone else knowing who you voted for. It would also have to be made clear to the writers entering that the script must be reasonable enough to fit inside the budget constraints. No point setting it on a submarine or in LA, as it would be impossible to do. Unsuitable scripts would not go forward to the shareholder vote)

Once we have a winning script, shareholders will be able to critique it, and these suggestions will be considered by the production executive. Important points would be put to the writer, and also a script editor/mentor would be assigned to help the writer get the script ready for production.

Meanwhile the production executive would have to begin to deal with the standard producer issues, such as budgetting, equipment, personnel, finding location, casting, and finding a director. Due to the short filming time and hopefully brilliance of the winning script we'd hope to get a known and experienced comedy director. Obviously for the director and acting talent there would be finacial/expenses reward. Casting would also be a votable issue for the lead characters. Shareholders would be able to view the casting for each actor in a role and vote. The production executive will ask for help from the shareholders during this process with various things like location, equipment, props etc. However the shareholder is not abliged to help further than the initial 45 pounds.

The filming would take place one weekend. The first day would be for the actors read-through and perhaps some external shooting if needed. The second day would be for the main shooting within the internal closed sets. Rushes from the fiming would be put online for the sharholders to view. Editing would then follow.

A DVD would then be produced of the final 30 minute sitcom and sent out to all shareholders. After this it's difficult to say what would happen.

In the event that the sitcom was picked up by a television channel, a formal production company would be formed as a limited company and the shareholders share would become real. In effect if there were 200 shareholders you would own 0.5% of the company. However the production executive would have the power to award non voting shares to others during the project, such as writer, director, actors etc

Comments please (more on details here rather tahn the overall premise). I do intend to take this forward to the first stage in the next few weeks. Rob