Here are FQ’s for your weekend pleasure.
Houston has a problem has a question.
Where do you stand on the concept of holograms of dead singers in concert with live bands? There's going to be a concert tour in which a hologram of Whitney Houston will appear on stage while playback of her vocals are backed up by a live band. I think the whole thing is grotesque and tasteless, and I question the intelligence of anyone paying to watch such a travesty.
Well, it certainly would be weird – especially if Whitney takes requests.
Any chance they could put something together like that for Caruso?
I’ve never been to one of those. I think they have them for Sinatra, Elvis, and Roy Orbison. I love their music and enjoy watching footage of them, but if I’m going out for the evening I think I’d prefer a live performance from someone who is alive. Call me picky.
Is a Whitney Houston hologram really more preferable than a Whitney Houston impersonator?
Terry Harvey asks:
About "you OK?". Practically every show I watch has a moment where one character asks another, "are you OK?" or simply "you OK?" Rarely does a TV episode or movie not have this moment, and sometimes multiple times. Is there any way around this writing device that is used so often? Or is it simply a necessary means for quickly advancing the story by green lighting a character to have their moment and letting the emotions flow? Have you used this dialogue in your stories? Everyone else does and it is easy to see why but do you feel this is a lazy device or a needed one that can't be avoided?
Truthfully, I’ve never thought about it, nor has it bothered me. My rule is simply this: In that given situation, is that what a person would really say?
In real life, if you see someone hit with some shattering news and wrestling with how to deal with it, “Are you okay?” seems an appropriate question. You need to hear how wrecked they are before you can deal with them properly.
But the question needs to be earned. If you’re asking “Are you okay?” because your friend can’t get good cell service in a bus, then I’d say it’s either unnecessary or get less brittle friends.
From J Lee:
Baseball question -- Any feelings, plus or minus on MLB's floating the idea of expanding the playoffs from 10 to 14 teams and letting the No. 2-3 seeds in each league pick their opening round opponent, in some sort of reality show setting?
I hate it. It’s just another example of baseball sacrificing the integrity of the game for a stunt and a way to make more undeserving teams competitive. And it just dilutes the product. It's a money grab, pure and simple.
Pennant races used to really mean something. You could win 100 games and if the other team won 101 you went home. The last two weeks of the season were delicious. Now good teams are assured playoff spots in mid-September and the only real races are which mediocre teams eek into the playoffs?
And mark my words, after 2021, the National League will be using the DH.
And finally, from Mark:
Could you write about how budgets are set for shows? Is it a negotiation? You'll say what sets you need and they'll give you some of them to start? Is hiring actors like getting an NFL team under the salary cap, so maybe you can't hire as many regulars as you'd like because the cost is too high? Do they put new shows on the small soundstage in the bad part of town until they make good and then move them to a better location? Would, say, the number of trips to Hawaii for Big Wave Dave's be something also negotiated?
Studios will negotiate “license fees” with networks. Let’s say in round numbers CBS gives you a million dollars for each episode of your sitcom. If you go over that number the studio has to pay the overage. In the old days, before networks owned studios, that was a risk often worth taking because the studios owned the shows and if FRIENDS became a big hit, Warner Brothers, not NBC would reap the billions.
Now networks are often negotiating against themselves. But they own the show. They might now even keep lower rated shows on the air to get enough episodes to use for their other platforms.
The studio has to determine whether the license fee is sufficient to produce the show. Salaries, production costs, stage rental, shooting on location – all must fit within that overall budget. To save money some shows shoot in Canada, or in converted warehouses in Sylmar, or on tighter shooting schedules.
If the show becomes a big hit then license fees go up as actors salaries rise and producers salaries rise. Let’s say an actor is signed for five years initially (with raises built in). After five years the network and/or studio has to roll up a Brinks truck.
There have been times when studios feel they can’t produce the show for the license fee they’re offered and they turn down a coveted series order. It just makes no sense financially.
And it’s becoming harder and harder to negotiate because networks want to save money but audiences are now accustomed to high production values. Today, we'd NEED to go to Hawaii on BIG WAVE DAVE'S.
What’s your FQ?
from By Ken Levine
Houston has a problem has a question.
Where do you stand on the concept of holograms of dead singers in concert with live bands? There's going to be a concert tour in which a hologram of Whitney Houston will appear on stage while playback of her vocals are backed up by a live band. I think the whole thing is grotesque and tasteless, and I question the intelligence of anyone paying to watch such a travesty.
Well, it certainly would be weird – especially if Whitney takes requests.
Any chance they could put something together like that for Caruso?
I’ve never been to one of those. I think they have them for Sinatra, Elvis, and Roy Orbison. I love their music and enjoy watching footage of them, but if I’m going out for the evening I think I’d prefer a live performance from someone who is alive. Call me picky.
Is a Whitney Houston hologram really more preferable than a Whitney Houston impersonator?
Terry Harvey asks:
About "you OK?". Practically every show I watch has a moment where one character asks another, "are you OK?" or simply "you OK?" Rarely does a TV episode or movie not have this moment, and sometimes multiple times. Is there any way around this writing device that is used so often? Or is it simply a necessary means for quickly advancing the story by green lighting a character to have their moment and letting the emotions flow? Have you used this dialogue in your stories? Everyone else does and it is easy to see why but do you feel this is a lazy device or a needed one that can't be avoided?
Truthfully, I’ve never thought about it, nor has it bothered me. My rule is simply this: In that given situation, is that what a person would really say?
In real life, if you see someone hit with some shattering news and wrestling with how to deal with it, “Are you okay?” seems an appropriate question. You need to hear how wrecked they are before you can deal with them properly.
But the question needs to be earned. If you’re asking “Are you okay?” because your friend can’t get good cell service in a bus, then I’d say it’s either unnecessary or get less brittle friends.
From J Lee:
Baseball question -- Any feelings, plus or minus on MLB's floating the idea of expanding the playoffs from 10 to 14 teams and letting the No. 2-3 seeds in each league pick their opening round opponent, in some sort of reality show setting?
I hate it. It’s just another example of baseball sacrificing the integrity of the game for a stunt and a way to make more undeserving teams competitive. And it just dilutes the product. It's a money grab, pure and simple.
Pennant races used to really mean something. You could win 100 games and if the other team won 101 you went home. The last two weeks of the season were delicious. Now good teams are assured playoff spots in mid-September and the only real races are which mediocre teams eek into the playoffs?
And mark my words, after 2021, the National League will be using the DH.
And finally, from Mark:
Could you write about how budgets are set for shows? Is it a negotiation? You'll say what sets you need and they'll give you some of them to start? Is hiring actors like getting an NFL team under the salary cap, so maybe you can't hire as many regulars as you'd like because the cost is too high? Do they put new shows on the small soundstage in the bad part of town until they make good and then move them to a better location? Would, say, the number of trips to Hawaii for Big Wave Dave's be something also negotiated?
Studios will negotiate “license fees” with networks. Let’s say in round numbers CBS gives you a million dollars for each episode of your sitcom. If you go over that number the studio has to pay the overage. In the old days, before networks owned studios, that was a risk often worth taking because the studios owned the shows and if FRIENDS became a big hit, Warner Brothers, not NBC would reap the billions.
Now networks are often negotiating against themselves. But they own the show. They might now even keep lower rated shows on the air to get enough episodes to use for their other platforms.
The studio has to determine whether the license fee is sufficient to produce the show. Salaries, production costs, stage rental, shooting on location – all must fit within that overall budget. To save money some shows shoot in Canada, or in converted warehouses in Sylmar, or on tighter shooting schedules.
If the show becomes a big hit then license fees go up as actors salaries rise and producers salaries rise. Let’s say an actor is signed for five years initially (with raises built in). After five years the network and/or studio has to roll up a Brinks truck.
There have been times when studios feel they can’t produce the show for the license fee they’re offered and they turn down a coveted series order. It just makes no sense financially.
And it’s becoming harder and harder to negotiate because networks want to save money but audiences are now accustomed to high production values. Today, we'd NEED to go to Hawaii on BIG WAVE DAVE'S.
What’s your FQ?
from By Ken Levine
Comments
Post a Comment