Friday Questions

 Hi kids.  Time for more Friday Questions.

 

Kendall Rivers starts us off:

 

With this current reboot trend I HATE but for some crazy reason is still going on, would you be down with a MTM reboot or even a live stage revival like Norman Lear did? Or would you be completely opposed to it due to the chance they would screw it up and make it shrill, mean, preachy and frankly much less funny like most sitcoms now?

 

I’m completely opposed to it because – why bother doing it?  You’re not going to improve on the original cast.  The dated wardrobe and flimsy sets are going to really stick out.  The actors are going to be doing impressions of the real cast. 

 

So other than for a ratings stunt and a money grab, what’s the upside?  It’s the MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW not the MARISSA TOMEI FILLING IN SHOW. 

 

Cedricstudio asks: 

 

Neil Simon Is constantly praised as a great playwright. I’ve never seen any of his work performed on stage but I’ve seen two movies based on his work. The Odd Couple (starring Jack Lemon and Walter Matthau) was enjoyable enough but did not blow me away. Last night I watched Murder By Death and was disappointed. The premise was promising (it’s a murder mystery spoof where five of the world’s most famous detectives—caricatures of Sam Spade, Hercules Poirot, Miss Marple, etc.—are locked in a castle and challenged to solve a murder. Then it is their host who winds up dead.) With an all-star cast and a Neil Simon script my hopes were high but I found it corny and ridiculous with most jokes falling flat. I’m not a writer so this might be sacrilege but I would take one of your MASH episodes over either of these films any day. Can you help me understand why Simon is so revered? What am I missing?

 

Okay, you know I love Neil Simon, but I agree about MURDER BY DEATH.  

 

But for his hugely successful plays: 

 

What you’re missing is context.  What you’re missing is being in a live theatre, hearing the dialogue crackle and the audience laughing at almost every line.  You can’t capture that in a filmed version.  You just can’t.

 

BAREFOOT IN THE PARK, although dated, is a joy to see on stage done right – even today.   But the movie version with Robert Redford and Jane Fonda is just a slog.  And Redford starred in it on Broadway. He was funny on stage.  In the film he's a mannequin. 

 

Once this fucking pandemic is over, find a decent theatre doing THE ODD COUPLE or some other highly regarded Neil Simon play, allow for the passing of time, and just let yourself go.  I bet you’ll laugh your ass. 

 

From Chuck:

 

I'm curious what your opinion is concerning Baseball Players/Managers being "microphoned" during a game. As I'm writing this I'm watching my team, the Cubs taking on the Cardinals on ESPN. (Not as bad as watching a FOX broadcast.) During game play, the announcers spoke to David Ross, Manager of the Cubs. They then spoke to the Manager of the Cardinals, Mike Shildt. He actually cut the conversation short saying he needed "to manage." (I say, Good for him!)

 

After that, ESPN had Cardinals Short Stop, Paul DeJong on microphone. They gabbed back and forth during game play. Cubs batter David Bote then hit a ball that went straight to the gabbing Paul DeJong. He got the ball and threw to first, but Bote was safe. (Good for the Cubs!) In my view, DeJong messed up this play because he wasn't paying as close attention to the game as he should have been. ESPN should not have been bothering him - or any other player/manager - during game play!

 

So, your opinion? And if you happen to agree with me, how do we put a stop to this thoroughly irritating ESPN (and FOX) practice? I say, LET THEM PLAY THE GAME!

 

This is another case of the tail wagging the dog.  MLB has allowed TV networks to dictate how they want to cover it.  Mic’ing players is for the benefit of the TV broadcast at the expense of the game.   But do you think Fox and ESPN give a shit?  Of course not. 

 

And especially now, where MLB is JUST a TV game (with no fans allowed in the stands), the networks call the shots.  All these additional playoffs, and match-up announcement shows – none of that improves the actual game and if anything, erodes its integrity. 

 

But MLB is taking the money.  And really, isn’t that all that matters? 

 

And finally, from WB Jax:

 

At what point of episode scripting are titles usually conceived? For you and David did such titles as "Death Takes A Holiday On Ice" come easily to you and were there times when either a story editor or fellow writer suggested an alternative (perhaps better, perhaps not) title for one of your scripts?

 

Just before you turn in the outline (although sometimes the title changes).  Once you submit the outline for payment, then it goes into the system and they need a title for records.  

 

But I will say this, titles don’t mean much.  You rarely see them on the screen.  It’s not like a movie or a play where a good title can help grab an audience.  So I advise writers not to spend two days coming up with the perfect episode title. 

 

I always liked the way FRIENDS handled titles.  Episodes were “The one where…”  and they just described what the general story was about.  Probably saved the writers days.

 

What’s your Friday Question? 

from By Ken Levine