As someone trying to find a way into the comedy world without being a writer-performer (or writer-producer, writer-director, or just writer-fabulously wealthy heiress), I think the problem with the view that "there is still a dearth of joke-packed ideas coming through the doors" is that the doors are all shut. How would they know if there are joke-packed ideas out here when it's impossible to get them, well, in there?
I've been to the last two Big Comedy Conferences, and advice for new writers is self-contradictory at best and not a reflection of reality at worst. We're told to reach out to producers directly because you can't get an agent without a credit, but then producers don't take unsolicited, unagented scripts (even when they say they do). We're told agents aren't there to get you work, but to represent you when you've got work, but in terms of actually finding work we're left with competitions and open calls, which are a soul destroying slog that frankly are no good to man nor beast. We're told to get an entry level job in the industry just to get access, but also told that that's pointless and we should focus on writing. (Also I'm 53. I'm not about to take a job as a 24/7 dogsbody.)
I've been thinking for months that we need a whole new process for surfacing talent that doesn't depend on taking a punt on a low-level job, or on oversubscribed and under-resources new writers' schemes and competitions, or on getting very lucky and just happening to meet the right person at the right time.
In the tech world, we talk about 'security through obscurity' or 'the practice of concealing the details or mechanisms of a system to enhance its security', which doesn't actually work. The TV world appears to practice 'commissioning through obscurity' or 'the practice of concealing the details or mechanisms of the commissioning system to decrease the number of applicants'. That clearly doesn't work either, because I'm pretty sure that there isn't actually a lack of talent. Humans haven't suddenly become less funny.
I know I might sound frustrated, and I suppose I am a bit. Trying to break in to TV feels very much like having to learn to burgle a house. I'm absolutely sure that there are some really great writers out there who just can't work out how to fight their way in because the whole system is so broken.
Totally understand your frustration! And I kind of share it. One might think it's okay for me with my track record but far from it. I'm taking plenty of non-sitcom writing gigs in order to make ends meet. And I love this: "Humans haven't suddenly become less funny." Such a good point. Something is clearly going wrong.
I have a friend who's very experienced, done lots of things we've all heard of, and even he was saying that he can't get any projects progressed. If he and you can't get projects moving, then there's obviously a problem somewhere.
Indeed, the doors are all shut. Well said. Are you signed up to Dave Cohen’s newsletter (https://www.davecohen.org.uk/)? The Dave Cohen that James did Sitcom Geeks with, that is. He’s apparently got something planned that is intended to bust some doors open. Or at the very least knock quite loudly on them.
Yes, I am! I'm doing his scriptwriting course at this very moment, as it happens. (It's very good!). Looking forward to seeing how his plans play out, because something really does need to change, and unfortunately I don't think that change is going to come from the commissioners.
From the States perspective, not enough money for streamers to dump into more than 8 episodes of the multicam entertainment-first model, even though that's how a lot of the old shows are so re-watchable, because you can get lost in them as a whole 26-episode season just carries you along with a reliable story engine. When we just get 8 episodes of That 90s Show, it makes the format look outdated in-and-of itself, not taking into account the weekly release model, the slow building of a connection with an audience, the strengthening of characters people were connecting with more, and the writing-out of those they weren't, etc... the format is still great. The delivery system needs to be readjusted for it.
I agree we need a balance between art and entertainment. I wonder if part of the problem is that programmes seem to get badged as comedy drama when they’re pure drama, and comedy when they’re wry at best. And then the new writers write their own version of what they think is popular these days, so it’s kind of reinforced that good comedy is no longer a thing that makes you snort your tea. But as you say, existing sitcoms that are properly laugh out loud are still popular.
I couldn't believe that The Bear won Best Comedy at the Golden Globes. It's not a comedy. And I'm not just saying that because I don't find it funny, I'm saying that because it rarely has jokes in, and the jokes it does have are more joke-like scenes that aren't funny because the whole thing has the setup of a drama, so they don't land. Oh, and because accidentally drugging children and exploding toilets aren't actually funny.
I look at some comedies that I'm not keen on, and I can at least say "Ok, I see the joke-like hole there" even when I don't find them funny. I can see their intention, even if it doesn't work for me. The Bear has none of that.
It seems commissioners want comedy-drama, drama with some comic moments, writer-performer comedy or black comedy, when what audiences want is just good old laugh.
As someone trying to find a way into the comedy world without being a writer-performer (or writer-producer, writer-director, or just writer-fabulously wealthy heiress), I think the problem with the view that "there is still a dearth of joke-packed ideas coming through the doors" is that the doors are all shut. How would they know if there are joke-packed ideas out here when it's impossible to get them, well, in there?
I've been to the last two Big Comedy Conferences, and advice for new writers is self-contradictory at best and not a reflection of reality at worst. We're told to reach out to producers directly because you can't get an agent without a credit, but then producers don't take unsolicited, unagented scripts (even when they say they do). We're told agents aren't there to get you work, but to represent you when you've got work, but in terms of actually finding work we're left with competitions and open calls, which are a soul destroying slog that frankly are no good to man nor beast. We're told to get an entry level job in the industry just to get access, but also told that that's pointless and we should focus on writing. (Also I'm 53. I'm not about to take a job as a 24/7 dogsbody.)
I've been thinking for months that we need a whole new process for surfacing talent that doesn't depend on taking a punt on a low-level job, or on oversubscribed and under-resources new writers' schemes and competitions, or on getting very lucky and just happening to meet the right person at the right time.
In the tech world, we talk about 'security through obscurity' or 'the practice of concealing the details or mechanisms of a system to enhance its security', which doesn't actually work. The TV world appears to practice 'commissioning through obscurity' or 'the practice of concealing the details or mechanisms of the commissioning system to decrease the number of applicants'. That clearly doesn't work either, because I'm pretty sure that there isn't actually a lack of talent. Humans haven't suddenly become less funny.
I know I might sound frustrated, and I suppose I am a bit. Trying to break in to TV feels very much like having to learn to burgle a house. I'm absolutely sure that there are some really great writers out there who just can't work out how to fight their way in because the whole system is so broken.
Totally understand your frustration! And I kind of share it. One might think it's okay for me with my track record but far from it. I'm taking plenty of non-sitcom writing gigs in order to make ends meet. And I love this: "Humans haven't suddenly become less funny." Such a good point. Something is clearly going wrong.
I have a friend who's very experienced, done lots of things we've all heard of, and even he was saying that he can't get any projects progressed. If he and you can't get projects moving, then there's obviously a problem somewhere.
Indeed, the doors are all shut. Well said. Are you signed up to Dave Cohen’s newsletter (https://www.davecohen.org.uk/)? The Dave Cohen that James did Sitcom Geeks with, that is. He’s apparently got something planned that is intended to bust some doors open. Or at the very least knock quite loudly on them.
Yes, I am! I'm doing his scriptwriting course at this very moment, as it happens. (It's very good!). Looking forward to seeing how his plans play out, because something really does need to change, and unfortunately I don't think that change is going to come from the commissioners.
From the States perspective, not enough money for streamers to dump into more than 8 episodes of the multicam entertainment-first model, even though that's how a lot of the old shows are so re-watchable, because you can get lost in them as a whole 26-episode season just carries you along with a reliable story engine. When we just get 8 episodes of That 90s Show, it makes the format look outdated in-and-of itself, not taking into account the weekly release model, the slow building of a connection with an audience, the strengthening of characters people were connecting with more, and the writing-out of those they weren't, etc... the format is still great. The delivery system needs to be readjusted for it.
I agree we need a balance between art and entertainment. I wonder if part of the problem is that programmes seem to get badged as comedy drama when they’re pure drama, and comedy when they’re wry at best. And then the new writers write their own version of what they think is popular these days, so it’s kind of reinforced that good comedy is no longer a thing that makes you snort your tea. But as you say, existing sitcoms that are properly laugh out loud are still popular.
Completely agree.
I couldn't believe that The Bear won Best Comedy at the Golden Globes. It's not a comedy. And I'm not just saying that because I don't find it funny, I'm saying that because it rarely has jokes in, and the jokes it does have are more joke-like scenes that aren't funny because the whole thing has the setup of a drama, so they don't land. Oh, and because accidentally drugging children and exploding toilets aren't actually funny.
I look at some comedies that I'm not keen on, and I can at least say "Ok, I see the joke-like hole there" even when I don't find them funny. I can see their intention, even if it doesn't work for me. The Bear has none of that.
It seems commissioners want comedy-drama, drama with some comic moments, writer-performer comedy or black comedy, when what audiences want is just good old laugh.