Friday Questions

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Friday Questions

    Some summer FQ’s for your beach reading pleasure.

    Matt in Westwood, CA leads off:

    You’ve mentioned on several occasions that during your time on MASH, it filmed on the soundstage next door to CHARLIE’S ANGELS. Given that is an iconic show as well, did you have any particularly memorable encounters with the actresses, JACLYN SMITH especially, or see filming of any memorable scenes that stand out?

    I don’t remember the circumstances that led to this, but one day I found myself in Jaclyn Smith’s trailer talking to her for about a half hour. I think she was considering developing a comedy. It’s a little hazy. But what I do recall vividly was that she was very sweet and was wearing a jumpsuit.

    I met Farrah once and Kate Jackson was kind of stand-offish. No trailer invites from either of them. And over a couple of seasons I did see them shoot a few people. On camera.

    Kathryn queries:

    Is it easier for a playwright to switch to television or a television writer to switch to live theater? Is the answer different for multicamera versus single cam? There was an article in our local paper about some playwrights making the switch.

    The key to both writing for multi-camera sitcoms and the theatre is gaining experience writing for live audiences. The rest is just format and structure differences. Single-camera TV writers have a tougher adjustment because they're not used to writing for live audiences.

    I think a multi-cam TV comedy writer making the transition to live theatre has a leg up over playwrights going the other direction because he’s used to daily run-throughs and fixing scripts in a timely manner. Sometimes playwrights have the luxury of a few days or months (after a reading) to determine what needs to be fixed and then execute the changes. TV writers have been through the wars and can sometimes rewrite quicker and more efficiently.

    But at the end of the day, talent is talent. If you’re good in one arena you’ll be good in another.

    tb asks:

    We've all seen successful, long running shows make big mistakes in an attempt to "shake things up". Whether it's a new character that doesn't work, or a new locale, or baby or whatever. Some shows never recover. So my Friday question is, what would you say to the writers of a successful show that are thinking of "shaking things up"?

    I’d say good for you. I’d much rather see a show strive to stay fresh than just rest on their laurels.

    Hit shows can get stale. I applaud the writers willing to take a risk and shake things up.

    And for my money, no one is better at that than Robert & Michelle King, creators and show runners of THE GOOD WIFE and THE GOOD FIGHT. Not every change works, but even in those cases, they make midcourse corrections. The upside is those series are always surprising and the changes at times are inspired.

    From Carter:


    Most people know that early “Wings” episodes featured a few “Cheers” crossover appearances, but those ceased after “Cheers” ended its run. Was there ever any talk of doing a crossover between “Wings” and “Frasier”?

    Not to my knowledge.

    The purpose of crossover episodes is to get a spike in the ratings for the show hosting the other show’s characters. WINGS really benefited by having CHEERS characters on their show.

    I’ll be frank. Characters from WINGS would not have resulted in a big spike in FRASIER’S ratings.
    What's your Friday Question?



    More...
Working...
X