Network, Studio, Production Company

I was at a seminar last night for tv writers and a question was introduced which made me realize many people don't understand the difference between a Network, Studio, and Production Company. So,

Network: A network distributes programming. They are the STATION that puts a show on the air, ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, USA, TNT, ESPN, etc. there are six major companies that own networks for SCRIPTED TELEVISION: FoxCORPS, CBSCORP, GE, Time Warner, Disney, Viacom, Sony.

FOX-Owned by FoxCorps
CBS-Owned by CBSCorps
NBC-Owned by GE
CW-Co-owned by CBS and Time-Warner
ABC-Owned by Disney

These channels DO NOT produce programs. They BUY programs and sell ad space to recoup their cost. You may ask, but Russell, I who produces these shows, I thought... Well they are produced by...

Studios: Each show is produced by a STUDIO. Studios are designed to FINANCE and PRODUCE television. These studios DO NOT distribute television, the finance shows and SELL THEM TO NETWORKS. If you are asking HOW Fox doesn't have a studio, the simple answer is THEY DO. Each network ALSO has a STUDIO that produces shows that air on their network.

FOX- 20th Century Fox
CBS-CBS Paramount
NBC-Universal Media Studios
CW-Warner Brothers
ABC-ABC Studios

So, you're pretty confident now, that whatever is on FOX is produced by 20th Century, CBS Paramount is producing everything on CBS, etc etc. Right? WRONG. While 20th Century does produce many fox shows, like 24, they also sell shows to other networks. My favorite current example is SCRUBS. Scrubs is produced by DISNEY, but was DISTRIBUTED by NBC. However, when NBC cancelled Scrubs, it was PICKED-UP by ABC for another season.

Why does this happen? A bevy of reasons; A show a studio is developing doesn't fit on the network they are producing for, a network thought they would like a show but then decided after seeing it they aren't wild about it, the studio specifically produces a show for another network, etc. etc.

When I lived in DC, I met a guy who worked at History Channel's studio, just like the model I've been talking about, but smaller. He explained their system like this. History Channel is only obligated to buy X amount of the content they produce. If history channel passes on a show, they are free to shop that show to other networks.

The point is, it's reciprocal. Sometimes the studio produces the show for another network, sometimes the network doesn't want the show. However, this shows why you'll be watching a show on CBS, and see a 20th Century Fox logo. Or when you're driving past the Warner lot and see banners from other network's shows.

Production Company: Most people think a production company is the company that actually PRODUCES the show. However, this is a misnomer. In actuality, a production company has EXACTLY the same role as a studio, but they are not owned by a network. Most production companies that work with television are successful producers, showrunners, directors, etc. That have OVERALL DEALS with a studio because of their success.

An OVERALL DEAL means this...A Studio will pay a production company X dollars, and in return they will own EVERYTHING the production company produces, whether it's ideas, scripts, etc, for the length of the deal. People like David E. Kelley, Joss Wheadon, J. J. Abrams have overall deals with studios.

So, there is a general overview of WHAT each type of entity does. Next time you're watching a show and you see a production company, a studio, and a network, you'll understand why it is the way it is.

Next time...I'll try to explain what syndication is...maybe...unless I forget.

Premise...

I'm so excited. This is the first time I can comment on a comment to the blog.

Dave writes:

I definitely agree that bad dialogue is an instant turn-off when reading a script. However, most producers will only even start reading the script if they’ve first been triggered by an intriguing premise. So when they start reading they’re looking to see if this is a movie, not whether the writer is the new Harold Pinter!

In my experience (but this may have to do with my penchant for structure), producers are reassured when the structure is clear and firm. All the details can be perfected during development, as long as the basic framework feels solid.

Having said that, great structure, great dialogue, great locations ... none of this can make up for a lousy, uninteresting premise."

I could not agree more. When thinking of a project, the first thing you should be thinking is...This premise...would I watch it if I wasn't writing it? Would I pay $10 to see it? Would I want my mother, brother, sister, uncle, best friend, to watch this movie? Would they even want to see it?

There is nothing worse that a boring, bland, run of the mill premise. In all of my reading, writing, and 'rithmatic, one thing I see over and over with my clients who have open submissions is a boring premise, which is a certain deal killer AND the first thing a reader comments.

As far as structure...once again I couldn't agree more. That's why I am trying so hard to modify my writing structure in order to make the structure perfect. I've spent so much time relying on my dialog to get the message through, that I forgot the most important thing to make someone read it, the structure.

As a reader, the thing I see with all of my CLOSED submission clients is that the premise in on point, pitch-able, and high concept, and the structure is relatively well-constructed. However, in almost every instance, the dialog and characters are just atrocious. Still...they are getting their film read, and the quirky esoteric unmarketable story sits on the shelf.

This is very important...if the structure is NOT good, and the PREMISE is not on point, NO ONE will read the script even if you are the next "Harold Pinter".

That felt good...like really gooood. Keep the comments coming.

Figuring out what you're terrible at

As promised...an optimistic post.

Writing and working in this industry is as much about finding your weaknesses as it is accenting your strengths.

For instance, I am great with dialog, decent on structure, and terrible at proofreading.

So, how do I account for that? I send my scripts to tons of people, have begun outlining more strictly, writing more extensive character developments, and trying to read scripts backwards. (yes, it's a little trick I learned recently. Try it)

The problem, not to sound boastful, is that in my opinion great dialog can make up for piss-poor structure. I look at the most recent re-write I did for a tv pilot I'm working on, and while I know the structure needs work, it sounds good, and flows because of the dialog, so it becomes difficult for me to see how to correct it. I know, I know, I know, it sounds terrible, and I know it does. On the other hand, great structure rarely makes up for piss poor dialog. But, I'm learning how to get the structure right.

But, that's why it's so important to see your biggest faults and PLAY TO THEM. Two of the most popular ways:

-Writing Groups--i have some excellent ones.
-Writing Partners--i am looking for one.

Either way, the easiest way to find your faults is to get other people's eyes on your script.

A professional will not only know where they are strong, they will be even more aware of where they are weak.

I'm obsessed with...

Google Analytics, and it's telling me that the average time spent on my blog is in a tail spin, and I think i know why.
I got a nice comment from a buddy of mine, a client actually, that told me my blog has been wholly depressing recently. I can't disagree, because I am in limbo, so many projects close to being completed, so much potential clearly pent up, and so many projects in development...it's daunting.

But, I promise, my next post will be optimistic again.

WOOHOO.

Making a movie...

...is incredibly frustrating because you have to rely on so many people. The dp has to light correctly, the actors have to act correctly, the camera op has to frame correctly, the producer has to produce correctly, and even the editor has to edit correctly.

Now, a lot of what that means is not only showing up and doing your job, but also doing it in a timely fashion. It is usually the problem that shows up in editing, because in low-budget films, you have to allow your editor and producers work on other projects in order to get a reasonable price. Either that or go with an inexperienced editor. Either way, what always ends up happening is a week becomes a month, and a month becomes a year. It's currently happening with my first feature, where we are 13 months out of principle photography. Now, granted, there were tons of problems, set-backs, and problems with all of the principles on the movie, but at the end of the day it's still 13 months out of principle.

Now, it wouldn't be that huge a problem, if we weren't having trouble lining up our next project, and if we didn't have a new project that is filming in October. So, we have to lock picture, do ADR, set sound/soundtrack, put up a website, and find a distributor.

It's definitely time to pull our stuff together and get this movie done.

Earthquake

Well, I felt my first earthquake today, 5.8. crazy.

Writing yourself into a corner...

happens. I'm currently writing a romantic comedy script about a guy and a girl who meets, fall in love, get disconnected, stop loving each other, and then start loving each other again... I know, a novel concept. However, the problem is that I just don't care about romantic comedies. They aren't my thing. And, since I'm not writing on assignment, I have no motivation to make the project something I care about. I'm just writing here and there, the inciting incident happens on page 6, but the character doesn't motivate his change until page 26. So far...it's boring. And that's the crux of my problem, the script is B-O-R-I-N-G, and that has made me write myself into a corner. Is it the usually corner, no. I can easily get myself out of it by restructuring the first act. The corner i'm writing into is not the normal corner (i.e. a situation that is wholly unsolveable by the main character), it's more of the corner of DO I EVEN WANT TO FINISH THIS SCRIPT and WHO THE HELL CARES ABOUT THESE CHARACTERS.

In fact, this happens with screenwriters more often that they would like to admit. I was talking with a screenwriter the other day who was talking about a great idea they had for a script, that 50 pages in they just stopped loving. Is this not the same as having an impossible situation that a character can not escape from?

Here is my dilemma. I have 26 pages of a spec script done. I know that i'm going to have at least a 120 page first draft for this script, because I am adding a lot of information I know I will either adjust, take out, or trim. I want to have every possible joke, slap-stick incident, and dumb, lumbering paragraph because I want to be able to edit judiciously.

This leads to a conundrum when dealing with a script you just don't care about...

a. is it that I will care about this script after editing, or do I hate the script?
b. is there a flaw in the moral distinction of the characters that will bite me in the ass later in the development of the story?
c. do I want to spend the next 2 months working on this project in order to sit back and say...yup, this is crap.
or

Do I think this is a project that can be saved, have some meaning, and succeed at being sold/produced?

This is the reason I love TV writing, 60 pages and you're done...max. Okay, maybe 70 for a long pilot or an hour long script. But revisions are easier, and finding the flaws is simple, if its not essential, it's gone.

So, as I sit writing this, staring at my script, I wonder if I wrote myself into a corner, a boring, unproductive corner, from which I should abandon and look at other projects. Maybe something violent, slick, and edgy.