Archives: Writing

This weekend, I caught up on the BBC’s awesome BTS doc on COME FLY WITH ME, the new series from LITTLE BRITAIN creators Matt Lucas and David Walliams.

One thought from an interview with Matt Lucas really struck me. Inevitably, there was a question about how you follow up a series as successful as LB was1. Lucas commented, on topping LB:

Can we do something as big as that? No. Can we do something better than that? Certainly.

And there’s the rub: whatever we’re setting out to create, the aim should never be about creating something bigger, simply creating something better.

Striving for size and reach will bring pressures and compromises; striving for quality will not only better ensure excellence, but also come with its own–much wider–rewards and may end up being both bigger and better.

1. and love it or hate it, you can’t deny its success [↩]

Sky Atlantic, the brilliant new HBO-inspired channel from Sky, is currently running a number of great, classic shows from the beginning. Last night, I caught up with the Pilot and first few eps of ER, a show I used to adore but only started watching from around Season 4 or 5.

The pilot isn’t anything all that special: there isn’t much in the way of plot; it’s just a random collection of traumatic events and an introduction to the characters. I’ve seen many better pilots in my time.

What’s easy to forget some 17 years on from that first airing is just how revolutionary and innovative E.R. was at the time.

Never before had a medical drama been shot in such a kinetic, absorbing style. Never before had a show allowed its characters to speak “normally”, without qualifying what “O2 sats” or “insanelylongmedicallynamedthingy” was. Never before had a show stretched its character’s personal arcs across more than a few episodes before nicely tying them up.

Now TV can’t get enough of the verité style; the best shows all worry more about the characters than the events; our favourite shows stretch character arcs and storylines across entire seasons1, without wrapping things up nicely at the end of each episode.

It’s easy when we look back at our old favourites2 to see them in the same light we see things now. But if we’re going to continue to innovate, it’s vital that we don’t forget what innovation looked like in the first place.

Remembering how someone set about doing things differently can inspire us new creative heights, allowing us to see how people looked at things from new angles and created something fresh, exciting and–ultimately–hugely influential.

What innovations did your favourite films and shows introduce? How did they change the landscape and inspire other creators to go further?

1. or even longer in some cases (LOST) [↩]
2. be they TV shows, films or any other artistic or creative endeavour [↩]

Psychology Today ran this article last week suggesting that acknowledging other people’s unhappiness is the key to making them feel happier. Sounds odd – backwards, even – since our usual response to someone telling us they’re unhappy or stressed is to be positive and encourage them.

When you think about it, though, how annoying is it when you’re feeling gloomy and someone tells you to “cheer up”? It certainly doesn’t cheer you up, does it?

I’ve found, too, that when other people deny or ignore my feelings, I tend to keep repeating myself (i.e., whining), because I think my feelings haven’t registered.

Have you found that acknowledging bad feelings allows them to dissipate better?

Gretchen Rubin, The Happiness Project Blog (Psychology Today)

The full post is a fascinating read. Check it out.

Thanks to LifeHacker for tipping me to the post with their original link here.

I opened up my TweetDeck this morning to find a tweet from Jon Reiss who, you’ll remember, featured in this PotW post a couple of weeks ago.  His linked through to a TechDirt article about building audiences and why those who think it’s too much time and effort are misguided at best.

The salient point, for me, is the following:

while building a loyal audience and community may take time and effort, in the long run, they provide you with the ability to actually focus more on creativity.

Mike Masnick, techdirt.com

Read the full article here.

Are you working on cultivating an audience right now? Is it too much work, or can you see the payoff on the horizon?

It doesn’t take a genius to work out the value of “Event TV”. Take last night’s Superbowl: people all over the world tuned in and felt compelled to take part in the chatter, bantering back-and-forth with friends, followers and random strangers.

In the age of the DVR1, VOD and online catch-up services2 more and more of us are watching our TV content time-shifted to suit ourselves. But if you want to be part of a conversation – if you want to experience the feedback as it happens – you need to be watching live.

The LOST finale is the obvious fictional TV reference3. Although it’s easily dismissed as a once-in-a-lifetime occurrence for fans of one particular show and thus something of an exception, it’s still worth noting that the LOST team had spent 6 years working up to this moment, carefully building their following and fanaticism to the point when it became not only “must-see TV” but “must-see-at-the-same-time-as-everyone-else TV”, the very definition of “event TV”.

Can we, as independent filmmakers and creators, produce the kind of content that is best experienced live and as it happens? Can we create “event” content?

The closest we have to it right now is probably The Production Office Live and Film Snobbery, shows that are available almost immediately after airing on the ‘net for anyone to view it at their leisure, but which the vast majority of the audience wants to see live so they can engage in the chat and discussion, whether on the website chat or via Twitter.  Even this, though, is factual content rather than fictional.

If they key to it is interaction and immediacy, is it possible – or even realistic – for us to create “event TV” in a fictional format? Or are we foolish to even aspire to such heights? Do the indie forms of distribution (VOD, digital download etc) inevitably mean it’s beyond our reach, or can we create content that will get people buzzing across platforms as they all watch our product together?

What do you think?

1. be it TiVo, Sky+ or whatever the dominant service in your area is [↩]
2. like the BBC’s iPlayer [↩]
3. just check out the spike in Twitter traffic as recorded here by the NY Post [↩]

This week’s most popular post on the blog was my Pick of the Web featuring Lucy V. Hay and Daniel Martin Eckhart‘s cross-talking posts on what it takes to succeed as a writer. You can read it here.

Today’s Sunday video for your viewing (and educational) pleasure it this fantastic piece by Turnstyle News on Lance Weiler‘s Pandemic 1.0 project that’s been running all week. Watch this video1 and learn how transmedia should be done. Spectacular; and makes me even more gutted that I wasn’t at Sundance this year to be able to participate.

1. you can also see it on Vimeo here [↩]

There are two great articles I want to highlight today, from two Twitter/LSWF buddies of mine.

Daniel Martin Eckhart writes on his blog about what it takes to make it as a screenwriter, his biggest insight (and no doubt point of debate) being:

The two most essential elements for a screenwriters are discipline and stamina. Talent is a distant third.

Daniel Martin Eckhart, Write, write, write.

Lucy V Hay, of Bang2Write fame, then goes a little further in her post, which references Daniel’s, talking about the paradox of the lucky/unlucky writer:

You’ll get no argument from when if you’re of the belief it’s TOTALLY about hard work, first and foremost; I think it’s important to recognise our own success as a writer will come as a direct result of that. However, I also think it’s important to realise it *could* have worked out very differently, despite our best efforts.

Lucy V Hay, write here, write now

What do you think? What makes a writer successful? Luck, timing, talent, hard work? All of the above?

Just before Christmas, Seth Godin, über-leader of tribes and the man behind the seminal ideavirus revolution, created the website for a new publishing project aiming to launch in early 2011, in association with Amazon.

If you haven’t already, go subscribe to their newsletter and have a look around the site. The Domino Project is, in their own words1, “reinventing what it means to be a publisher”.

These are exciting times for global publishing; when someone with Seth’s ability, influence and forward-thinking partners up with such a global powerhouse as Amazon something exciting is likely to happen, whatever it may eventually be.

If you want to be a part of it, they’re also looking for a Domino Street Team across the world to help them roll out their plans throughout the next 6 months or so. You can read more about the role and the people they’re looking for here or head straight over to the application form and dive right in2; I already have.

The Domino Project is named after the domino effect—one powerful idea spreads down the line, pushing from person to person. The Project represents a fundamental shift in the way books (and digital media based on books) have always been published. Eventually consisting of a small cadre of stellar authors, this is a publishing house organized around a new distribution channel, one that wasn’t even a fantasy when most publishers began.

The Domino Project, thedominoproject.com

1. and I emphasise the “their” in that sentence – it’s truly a collaborative effort [↩]
2. you’ve got until this Friday, 28th Jan 2011 [↩]

According to just about everyone1 today (17th January) is the most miserable day of the year. Every year.

But why? And since when?

I’m sure the original assertion was based on hard data, but how hard can that data now be if we all know we’re supposed to be at our most miserable today?

If we’re told every year that 17th January is the most miserable day of the year, that makes 17th January make us feel miserable.

Telling people something as fact will make it just that, but we can tell ourselves differently.  Whatever you want to be – happy or sad, jubilant or miserable – just be it, because living it will make it so.

1. or everyone in the media at least [↩]

My most productive time of day is very early in the morning. I’m used to being up at 6.30am to take K to the station for her commute to London and I know I work best in those 2-3 hours immediately I get up.

I have another burst of focus around the 5-6pm mark, where I tend to push myself into completing things before calling it a night.

Finding these productivity peaks not only helps you be more productive, but is much less likely to allow you to become distracted by other things. Just remember to close down Twitter and Facebook while you’re trying to make the most of your peaks.

When is your productivity peak?