Howdy Scribes,
Re: TV pilot (one-hour drama) structure, is there a widely-accepted/preferred one in the professional TV screenwriting realm? The Trottier section on TV is pretty sparse, and opinions on the Interwebz abound (shocking I know). I'm "talking" four v five acts, teasers, tags, etc.
For the submissions for the studio writing program I applied to last year I wrote Teaser+Five Acts+Tag (Yikes) for sample A, and for B it was Teaser + Five Acts. Always a Teaser and Tag for pilot scripts? I know some make Act V the Tag (or include it in it at least)...and some act number decisions are based on commercial-based pauses in programming, or because they make sense for the story.
To me a Teaser and a Tag make sense for the stuff I write, and I also enjoy them in content I consume. Kind of hard to gauge convention from many of the pilot scripts of well-known series because, you know, there will be deviations from the norm, and there actually is one that has a twelve-page Teaser...
Cheers,
~Mike
2 people like this
Howdy, Mike Childress. I'm mainly a feature script and short script writer, but I've written a few TV pilots.
I used Teaser and four Acts for a one-hour Action/Crime series.
I used Teaser and four Acts for a one-hour family series.
And I used Cold Open, three Acts, and Tag for a half-hour cartoon kids TV show.
I made Act Five the Tag in the kids show.
Stage 32 has Education for TV writing you might wanna check out (www.stage32.com/education/search?term=TV%20writing).
4 people like this
It's pointless caring about because show-runners aren't that interested in speculative pilots, never mind ones from amateurs. I know of a show runner who doesn't even want to see a pilot. They only really care about the bible as that will need a ton of development before scripting even begins.
4 people like this
^^^ this!
Basically tv staff writers format pages the way showrunners & network execs want.
Writers Guild Foundation have hundreds of actual production tv scripts. Seems every showrunner boss has their own particular format style. Dont know about contests/fellowship formatting rules. Maybe mimic a show you think fits your style.
https://www.wgfoundation.org/script-formats
2 people like this
Maurice Vaughan I remembered you mentioning you had written pilots too. Good stuff, that is a diverse group of pilots!
CJ Walley and Dan MaxXx So the pilots I have written thus far ("non-spec" aka original stories) are solely for big studio writing programs, not fellowships or contests (although I did break down and enter one in LaunchPad Pilot), where if you make it all the way through selection you are actually staffed on series the studios produce. So someone at a studio is going to read, at least, your primary pilot sample. The second one usually only gets read if you advance. The PROBLEM with said programs is, as a novice like myself, you are going up against people who may have up to one year of experience as a writer on a production... Basically I am trying to look the most like the people who were already staff writers, ergo the questions about structure. I have skimmed through a ton of scripts, including pilots, at this juncture, and they, of course, run the gamut, e.g. the 12-page Teaser I referenced in the initial post. The funny thing about "reading" scripts now for me is I think I have kind of morphed into a screenwriting technocrat (Thank you Law of Unintended Consequences...) due to: interactions on here, reading a screenwriting book cover-to-cover, immersing myself in online resources, etc. That's okay because looking at other scripts I know my current/recent stuff is technically-sound. I see a LOT of No-Nos in scripts I look at it, not just based on what Trottier states in the book, but on what I have seen professionals on here and other forums/sites state about formatting/structure.
2 people like this
Mike Childress There is definitely a structure to writing one-hour pilots. I did an extended webinar on this sponsored by Netflix (they also approved the content and use it internally) that has been downloaded tens of thousands of times, especially since it's free. Look on the education tab under webinars and search for my name or for Netflix. I hope it's helpful.
1 person likes this
Anna Marton Henry Nice one, thanks!
4 people like this
Now that I've become a Showrunner on a half hour series, I've become a little more relaxed when it comes to writing format - but I still like the traditional format because I understand it.
1 person likes this
Doug Nelson I found about about the first program a week before the deadline, and had written nothing for TV at the time. Fortunately I had written several feature and Short scripts by then so adapting to TV formatting wasn't too much of a hill to climb. It was a little weird with the slightly different act structure and writing non-standalone stories that are meant to go beyond that first script...
3 people like this
Mike Childress, I think you're falling into the trap of over-worrying about the superficial here. You should be being judged on your story-writing and entertainment abilities, not on if you can fit into a certain shaped box - which we've already determined the shape of which would be a guess anyway. If the program can't compensate for the fact most people won't know exactly how they may want things, I'd question its validity, appeal, and professionalism.
As ever, you need to be leaning heavily into what motivates you. That's where your best writing is, and that's what matters the most. This is the problem with the whole competition/evaluation/program/fellowship scene. The rating process is so vague overall, yet somehow also so potentially strict at reader level, it drives people toward madness.
For what it's worth, the only speculative pilot I've ever written is a teaser, three acts, and a tag.
3 people like this
CJ Walley I did stick to my ideation guns (somewhat) with the first two pilots; I had a choice between comedy and drama so I was like, "Sci-Fi-Dramas it is!" At the risk of sounding braggadocious I know I can craft interesting stories and make them flow well. Now I know I can write in the format with decent technical ability (one checkmark for that grading sheet). The burning question is "Do Hollywood and film consumers (en masse) want what Mike wants/writes?!" TBD...
One of the funny ironies about screenwriting for me, particularly for competitions, is that everyone will be like "Draw the reader in on PAGE ONE (or ten depending on whom you talk to...)" and I will often be bored to absolute and utter tears early on in series/features... I do harken the advice of others, butttt also take everything I read/hear with a grain of salt. It all goes back to this perpetual, imperfect information about readers (in any screenwriting sub-realm). "Does this person loathe sci-fi?" "Did the reader blow through one hundred scripts this week thus far and is now suffering from severe Brain Drain?" "Is this story analyst a technical autocrat who believes all scripts should look as they think?" That's the reason I try to conform somewhat and attempt to be a "wolf in sheep's clothing" to a degree. So to me, like with most things, it comes down to a numbers game. Saturate the industry with your works across multiple fronts and keep on writing as you do.
3 people like this
Mike Childress, yeah the mythical bastard reader god trope. A system's been built that uses pro readers and gives scripts the chance they need. It's The Gauntlet by ScriptHop. That's what it takes to do it right and the real costs associated. The competition world is almost entirely just amateurs judging amateurs with the latter obsessing over what the former may or may not want. It's not worth the brain energy.
3 people like this
CJ Walley I have seen Hemmings and Hawings about The Gauntlet on forums before, part of the reason I like Stage 32 is I can "hear" opinions on everything under the Screenwriting Sun from people I have actually interacted with for a decent amount of time rather some random Bro on Reddit...
From what I have seen, basically everywhere, is that people write a screenplay and they get as excited as they did when they first got those training wheels off that bicycle as kids, like "Okay, I am ready to fly!", and even if they know of the inherent xenophobic/closed nature of the industry the sweet siren song of the competitions ushers them gently towards the light. "Beware of Greeks bearing gifts." So if you, or another veteran writer/industry person, warns them off of them for whatever reason, that gravitational pull of promises of potential screenwriting fame and fortune ensures the masses still trod on toward the light. It makes sense though, I mean people play the national lotteries where odds of winning the jackpots may be just slightly better than selling someone your first (or fifth) spec script.
4 people like this
Mike Childress, I'm on the ScriptHop advisory board and thus saw all the ins and outs of developing The Gauntlet. Many people (mainly on Reddit) have attacked the platform but it's the honest reality of doing things properly. That's why so many people industry side back it.
I've always favoured Stage 32 for mainly the reason you have mentioned; I can do my due diligence on where the advice is coming from. When I first joined here, over ten years ago, I was asking some very early questions and I could determine if the person giving me advice was actually talking from experience. That was a game-changer. Prior to that, I'd been on DoneDealPro, where people's credentials were basically "trust me, bro" and the most aggressive and dogmatic dictated the consensus.
I mean, holy crap, when I look back, when I look back at how some of those people talked and how they are still basically trolling communities with nothing to show for themselves. I feel so sorry for those who are still sucked in by their BS and arrogance.
2 people like this
CJ Walley Re: The Gauntlet it's been awhile since I trawled screenwriting threads for info, but from what I recall the lion's share of the lamentations about it had to do with the cost. I kind of align with you on the whole investment in screenwriting thing, i.e. almost everything is going to be a money-suck, Final Draft, competition fees, coverage costs, webinars, screenplay writing books, possibly a new computer/keyboard, etc., etc. so gird your loins. I mean $380 is a decent amount to shell out, but the question people should ask themselves is "Is the ROI worth the initial squeeze?" Just another cost-benefit analysis. Probably extremely likely that some people have dropped well over that amount in contest entry fees and never placed in one. Are industry people elsewhere helping you advance your craft? I think the analogy I am probably looking for is The Gauntlet is potentially akin to a manager whilst other avenues are maybe more like agents... Admittedly, I know very little about The Gauntlet at this point, but eventually I will do my due diligence and do some investigating.
4 people like this
Mike Childress, at the end of the day, there are luxuries that others can take advantage of. The Gauntlet is expensive. To do the job right is expensive. To take that opportunity means a cost many feel that cannot afford to risk. That's fair enough, but it doesn't make the service any less effective, fair, and valuable.
Screenwriting is such an insanely cheap form of the arts to get into. I see people grumbling all the time. It's crazy. I used to have to spent nearly $1,000 a year just to have the Adobe suite I needed to work when I was in marketing and design, and that's before the $2,000 iMac, $100 Pantone swatches, etc...
3 people like this
CJ Walley Film School at USC: "One million dollars!" Forty screenwriting competition entry fees: One BILLION dollars. Final Draft 13: $200.
4 people like this
Yeah man, everything you just said I agree with. I graduated from Adv Dip Pro Screenwriting recently and one of my specials was TV Drama. Teaser+Five Acts+Tag. Yep, that's the way to go :)
3 people like this
Lukas Strautins Nice!
2 people like this
Congratulations on graduating, Lukas Strautins!