Breaking News: Friday Questions - News Paper

New FQ’s for a new year.

The Bumble Bee Pendant starts us off.

I'm always intrigued by how a writer of a show/screenplay/whatever can simply say, "I am going to write a totally new draft and not include anything from the old script."

How does someone's previous version not influence a new version? How do you pretend that anything you thought worked in the previous iteration, not make it into the new one?

Re a teleplay, I just go back to the original outline or make a new one and work off of that, not even consulting the previous draft.

Believe me, I would MUCH rather work off a writer’s draft, even if it’s to save a few jokes or scene that still works. But when a script requires a page-one rewrite it missed the target by a wide margin.

Same with features. In those cases, not only might the structure change but the tone as well. So even if there were some good jokes or moments in the original they would not fit with the new tone.

The big difference between the two is that for a teleplay, if I’m the showrunner it’s my job to present the best script I can no matter how much extra work I have to put into it. With features, if I know the assignment will be a page-one rewrite I ask for way more money than polishing an existing draft.

sanford asks:

I was looking up something about the famous Chuckles episode. I found this clip of Ed Asner talking about how the show was short and they needed another scene to fill the time. As he explained there was so much laughter that it filled all the time they needed. Has anything like this happened with any of the shows you worked on?

The pilot of BIG WAVE DAVE’S. At the dress rehearsal it was right to time. Normally you can count on a two to four minute laugh spread once it’s filmed. On this night we got a TEN minute laugh spread.

That was great until we had to edit the damn show down to time.

Tom Asher has a baseball question.

Why don't we see more stolen bases? Too many managers looking for the three run homer?

That’s the new analytics of baseball. Get used to it.  The thinking now is that it’s not worth the risk of losing an out to steal a base. Do you know that there were some teams that did not pitch-out ONCE last year?

Personally, I think it’s short-sighted. Just the threat that a runner might steal often distracts or even rattles the pitcher. And the infield is a little jumpy too, anticipating they might have to leave their position to take a throw.

But that’s the game today. You could have four infielders on the right side of the diamond, giving the hitter a free single if he hit it to the left side. And instead the hitter swings from his ass and tries to hit a home run.

Pitchers and catchers report next month!!!

And finally, from Stephen Marks:

(This is) the Friday question that will set Friday questions back 20 years. The Friday question where the answer may have me running over to Earl's blog, getting into the fetal position, and sucking my thumb as I rock back and forth. Ken, do you podcast in the nude?

Only when I interview guests.

from By Ken Levine http://bit.ly/2LRPCIn
Breaking News: Friday Questions - News Paper