OH HAI, I CAN HAS TURING-COMPLETE?

Twisted, Genius, and Cute, all in one language.

LOLCODE. A programming language for lolcats.

Some examples follow.

First… Well, what else could possibly be first?


HAI
CAN HAS STDIO?
VISIBLE "HAI WORLD!"
KTHXBYE

And here’s an if/then construct with some I/O action:


HAI
CAN HAS STDIO?
I HAS A VAR
GIMMEH VAR
IZ VAR BIGGER THAN 10?
YARLY
BTW this is true
VISIBLE "BIG NUMBER!
NOWAI
BTW this is false
VISIBLE "LITTLE NUMBER!"
KTHX
KTHXBYE

There is a current spec available here. And, may the Sweet Lord Jesus help us all, there are even implementations.

And yes. It’s turing-complete. Which means that any program you can write in any programming language – such as spreadsheets, word-processing programs, games, or a program to provide firing solutions for nuclear missiles – can be written in LOLCODE.

Gives me a warm fuzzy feeling inside.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 4 Comments

The correct answer is: “A threesome.”

If you and a couple of female friends ever get drunk together, and you get to talking about sex, and they ask you what your favourite sexual fantasy is, the correct answer is “A threesome.”

This is because to a certain extent, they have the power to help you out in this quest.

And the thing that turns you on most in the world is to have your sex al fresco, or tied up, or in public, or while someone is pissing on you, that’s all well and good, but that is not the correct answer, even if it is.

The correct answer is a threesome.

Because it will be interesting, and you’ll probably enjoy it, and you’ll certainly learn something about yourself. And they probably won’t be interested in helping you out with this fantasy but you just never know your luck, they might.

So.

When someone working in the television industry asks you what programmes on British TV you’d really like to work on, the correct answer is not Torchwood.

Even if it is.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 5 Comments

Hammer Time

It was only a few years ago that I found out the truth about Hammer Films.

As a youngster, I used to watch their movies as they came on the television late at night. Sex, death, blood, toplessness, and lesbianism.

Obviously as a young teen these concepts had no effect on me at all.

Hammer died.

It wasn’t moving with the times. In the US Rosemary’s Baby and The Exorcist redefined horror. Hammer retaliated with Captain Kronos, Vampire Hunter. Unless you’re a horror afficionado, you won’t have heard of this. Which tells you all you need to know.

So when a few years ago Taste The Blood of Dracula came on the telly, my friend Nick and I settled in for a night of amusement at the creaky old vampire film.

(Minor spoilage follows. Turn away from the computer screen now if you don’t wish to know the result.)

Peter Sallis has resurrected Dracula, who’s put the bite on his young daughter. Big D and the daughter turn up at the local church, and Peter Sallis begs for his life. Big D refuses to show mercy, and Peter Sallis’s daughter heads towards him with a stake.

And she puts the stake to his heart.

And she plunges it in.

And he screams and screams and screams but she just will not stop and there’s blood everywhere and he screams and screams and screams but she just will not stop.

And then it’s finally, finally over.

And that’s when I realised that the versions I’d originally seen had been quite heavily censored.

So you see, Hammer has a reputation for cosy Horror. But that’s really not the case. Back in the day, they really were leaders in their field.

Hammer died.

It was many years ago. All that was left was the brand name and some remake rights tangled up in all sorts of IP nastiness.

Every few years the brand would get bought again, and someone would promise that there would be new Hammer films Real Soon Now.

Never happened.

But there’s a new owner in town. And this time it feels like we really might get some new films under the Hammer insignia.

Behind the revived Hammer are John de Mol and Simon Oakes. At the recent Screenwriters’ Festival, Simon talked for a little bit about his plans for the studio.

There are two strings to this bow. A low budget division which will make 4 or 5 films a year in the $2-4 million range, and the high-budget division which will aim for (eventually) two or three releases a year in the $15-20 million range.

It’s a great business plan. Low-budget horror has a good track record selling onto DVD, and we have the possibility of breakout hits later. The Hammer brand still has a great deal of equity behind it and some nice IP rights ripe and ready for exploitation.

And: For the UK industry, these are quite serious figures, even for the lower price range. Really very serious money indeed.

Things are looking good for Hammer.

And with a bit of luck, we’ll find that we can scream and scream and scream and this time they just will not stop.

EDIT: The first version of this post incorrectly claimed Bray Studios had shut up shop. They are in fact alive and well and living on the banks of the Thames.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 3 Comments

David Shore

A couple of weeks ago I went to an event at BAFTA hosted by mediaXchange. MediaXchange are a company who try and bring creatives together across the Atlantic – so for example TV execs in the UK might be taken across to LA in order to shadow a showrunner for week.

In this case, though, the event was in London. It was a full day of talks from drama creators and showrunners, in the first part of which they brought David Shore across to talk about House. The cost was £125 for new writers (defined as someone without an agent or a television credit), and well worth the money in my opinion. Go check ’em out.

A few of my scribbled notes follow:

His original problem with the series was simple: Germs don’t have motives. So how do you get dramatic followthrough from that? It took him several months of thinking through a line of attack before writing the pilot, which was written in two weeks.

David’s job as showrunner is to do final rewrites. He runs his writers’ room in a different way to many shows – but at the end of the day, there are as many styles of writers’ room as there are showrunners. David only has about twelve days a year in which the staff are all gathered together to break story, and these are used to break the serial elements of the show.

A writer will come to him with a basic idea, which he’ll give a Yea or Nay to. After that, it goes to a 2 page story outline: What’s the disease, and who is the person. David will give notes on that, along the lines of “Here’s what’s good about it, and here’s what’s not.”

The writer will go ahead and rewrite the two-pager as required.

When it goes to script, the writer will get two or three drafts. The final draft is then done pair-writing in David’s office. This works by having a big computer with two screens. They’ll then go through it line-by-line, with the script on-screen, amending as necessary.

Obviously this doesn’t happen all the time due to production deadlines – but he does it this way so that the writer will learn more about his writing style, which should ease the writing next time. After all, the voice of the show is that of the showrunner.

His job is therefore to bring consistency to the show.

Medically, the production gets advice from a nurse on set, a doctor on the writing staff, and three external doctors who give notes on scripts. “A real doctor wouldn’t say that, they’d say this.” These three are also available to the writers for phone consultations.

David used to set a writing exercise for staffers on a previous series:

  • Choose an issue
  • Write a paragraph about what you believe on the issue
  • Write another paragraph completely disagreeing with you

When reading specs, he prefers to read specs for a show that a writer didn’t work on… that way you know that they wrote it 100% themselves, and it wasn’t rewritten completely by the showrunner before production.

Regarding notes: If someone doesn’t like something, there’s probably a problem. It might not be the problem they’ve identified, and the solution they’re offering may be awful… but it’s likely that there really is a problem somewhere.

Fixing problems identified by notes is good. That means you’ve got one more person going to bat for the episode.

Finally he passed on some advice he’d received years ago: If you want to teach a junior writer a lesson, shoot their first draft.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 5 Comments

Spoilers for Utopia

That’s last Saturday’s episode of Doctor Who.

I know everyone else has done this already.

But I feel I have to as well.

Spoilers below. Turn away now if you haven’t seen the episode.

Really, I mean it.

Last chance to turn back.

Here we go:

AAAAAAAAAAAH! AAAAAAAAAAAH! AAAAAAAAAAH!
It’s only the motherfucking MASTER! AAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Thank you.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Clams and Toppers.

If you don’t have Jane Espenson‘s blog on your must-read list, you really ought to.

She writes regularly on the process of creating spec scripts.

Also, about what she had for lunch, but as that’s a story on a par with Tom Baker’s Scarf, we’ll let it slide.

Having started out as a comedy writer, Jane regularly talks about the tricks and pitfalls of the trade. One of the pitfalls is the type of joke known as a clam.

A clam is a joke so old that everyone knows it. Some common examples:

“Did I just say that out loud?”
“That went well, I thought.”
“I don’t mean to be impolite, but…”

Funny-once, as Mike the sentient computer might put it.

How do you defeat a clam? With a twist. Move it along and freshen it up.

So here’s Penny Arcade’s take on one of the all-time favourites. Pretty funny, n’est?

But then, the next strip is what’s known as a topper – a gag which builds on top of the first one.

The great thing about toppers is that all the setup has been done already, to get the laugh for the first joke, so they’re effectively a free laugh.

Avoid clams. Embrace toppers.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Why talent is irrelevant

Some people claim that writing can’t be taught.

That there’s an indefinable spark in a few which, in time, will blossom.
That if you don’t have such a spark, training will do nothing for you.
That hard work and experience is not as important as talent.

This point of view is, in a word, bollocks.

Here’s why.

Let’s assume that you (yes you sir, you madam) have a certain amount of talent. Doesn’t matter how much, but there it is, a certain amount of talent.

Let’s also assume this talent might get you a job as a writer (or director, or actor, or whatever your creative profession may happen to be) if the right person happens to meet you at the right time.

Now, you can’t increase this natural pool of talent by experience and hard work. If you could, then the improvement would (by definition) be down to experience and hard work. Not the raw talent.

We can also safely assume that experience and hard work will sometimes get you a job that you wouldn’t have got without it.

You become a better writer the more you work at it. You gain contacts and friends in the industry the more you hang out with them. Sometimes one or both of these things will tip the scales, get you a job that you might not have had otherwise.

And the harder you work, and the more experience you have, the more cases in which you’ll get a job that you otherwise wouldn’t.

Regardless of the amount of talent that you had in the first place, sometimes hard work and experience will tip the scales in your favour.

Finally, if you were to believe that experience and hard work were the only thing that actually got you a job and that talent didn’t come into it at all – not one jot, not one tittle – then you would work harder and get more experience. Because that’s the only thing that matters, right?

So if you believe that talent doesn’t matter, you’ll work harder and get more experience.

Which will get you more jobs than you would have otherwise.

So if you believe that talent doesn’t matter, you’ll do better in the industry than you would have otherwise, even if it does.

So work hard. No matter how good you think you are.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 10 Comments

Name and Shame

There’s a lot of talk in the scribosphere at the moment about posting under your own name, and whether you should or not.

(Some thoughts from Danny, Jason, and Phill.)

I post here under my real name. That’s because I want people to know who I am.

In its own small way, this blog is an advert for my writing and myself, a way for people to find out a little more about me.

There’s a down side to standing behind my own name, and that’s this:

I can’t critique TV or film shows I don’t like.

This blog is associated with my writing, is part of the information footprint about me. While I would dearly love to spend posts and posts disrespecting certain shows, I can’t.

Because the people running those shows might want to work with me some day. And so leaving a trail of breadcrumbs about how much I despise their children might not be such a good idea.

Anonymity would help me get around this. A blog without my real name attached would let me rant and rave and vent about some of the rubbish that gets on our screens.

And yet…

If I was anonymous, I’d lose the most useful part of the blog. Making contact with other smart people at the same stage of their careers as me. Getting my name known.

Given that, it’s not too difficult to play nice.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 8 Comments

The Table Read

It’s a really simple concept, and you’d think it would be more widely done.

You’ve written your spec. It’s as good as you can make it. You’ve been through a dozen drafts, stripped back the action paragraphs and deflowered the prose. The characters have objectives that they’re working towards, and problems that they need to overcome. Things get worse before they get better.

You’ve sent it out to your trusted readers and rewritten again based on the notes that they sent.

Twice.

And finally, finally, you’re ready to start the cold-calling to see who wants it.

Not so fast, buddy.

There’s one more thing to ensure your script is in tip-top condition before you send it out.

The Table Read.

What it is

The final test of whether or not your script works is going to be hearing it read aloud.

Before production, they’ll have a table read just like this to find out what’s right and what still needs fixing.

Why not have one yourself and fix it before then? That way the agents, actors, and directors you send it to will think that you’re so good you got it right the first time. They need never know the truth.

How it works

It’s quite simple really. You get some actors round and they read the script. You take notes and make it better.

It’s only one more draft. The last push…

You will need:

– Some actors
– A place to read
– Copies of your script
– Pen and paper

Actors

If you’re in LA, you know actors already. Take a look around your apartment block until you find one.

You’ll also need to produce a character list, together with (roughly) the number of lines each character has. This’ll help you to allocate the strongest actors to the main characters. Screenwriting software will do this for you automatically; otherwise get out a pen and paper.

Unemployed actors are happy to read for you. It keeps them in practice. And every actor is unemployed for a large part of their career.

If you buy them a crate of beer to share and some food to eat after the reading’s finished, they’re even happier. A big communal bowl of pasta and pesto with some garlic bread will work fine.

Trained actors are ideal, but really don’t stress too much about it, or casting. All you actually need is people to read the dialogue aloud.

If you really honestly can’t find any actors, use your friends. Acting ability is just a bonus.

A place to read

You’ll need a space big enough for you and the actors. A garden, or a village hall, or a rehearsal room, or a garage, or your own front room. Enough chairs for everyone to sit down on and a table to sit at would be a bonus.

It can be helpful to have an audience who aren’t performing. If you can fit ’em in, great. If not, don’t stress about it.

Scripts

Email a copy of your script to all the actors a few days in advance, so they can read it beforehand. If you let them know what part they’re playing, they’ll even have a chance to do some character work.

Nevertheless, some people won’t have received it, will forget to print a copy, or just won’t have read it. Have plenty of spare scripts photocopied that you can give to them on the day.

Pen and Paper

You’ll be needing this to take notes.

How it all works

Get everyone to arrive about half an hour before you want to start. This’ll give people a chance to settle down and say hello to each other.

Start by assigning parts to actors, if you haven’t already. You’ll probably need to double some roles – try to avoid having an actor playing two characters in the same scene. While funny, it’s not as helpful as it could be.

Don’t forget that you’ll need someone to read the stage directions. While you might think that people will be able to read along and follow their scripts, it never works out that way.

As the reading progresses, you’ll be able to see where the actors stumble over words, and in which speech you’ve accidentally placed a filthy double entendre. If you’re lucky, you might get laughs or gasps in the right places.

Take notes as you go.

When it’s done, have a quick comfort break. Tea and/or beer can be brought out for actors and audience (if any) at this point, cos the hard part’s over.

You’ve still got one more job to do though – going round the table and asking for notes. And writing them down.

This is where you find out if the characters’ motivations are clear. If the plot was gripping and understandable. And if the audience actually liked it.

As ever, just say “Thanks for that” and move on when you’re taking the note. This is not the place to explain or defend your work.

And when everyone’s had their say, serve up some food for everyone and pour a drink for yourself.

Job done.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 6 Comments

Sanctuary

noun (pl. sanctuaries) 1 a place of refuge or safety. 2 a nature reserve. 3 a place where injured or unwanted animals are cared for. 4 a holy place. 5 the part of the chancel of a church containing the high altar.

ORIGIN originally denoting a church or sacred place in which, by law, a fugitive was immune from arrest: from Latin sanctuarium, from sanctus ‘holy’.

And that’s all that the Compact OED has to say on the matter.

But more relevantly to this blog, it’s also the name of a new SF show.

And even more relevantly: It’s being premiered on the Internet, has been designed from the get-go to be experienced through more than one medium, and has some real (read experienced) talent behind and in front of the cameras.

So I got in contact with showrunner Damian Kindler and asked him what was going on.

What’s the story of the Sanctuary pilot? Tease us!
Sanctuary follows the exploits of Dr. Helen Magnus (Amanda Tapping), physician to beings with extraordinary powers, seeker of new life forms, and when the need arises, out-and-out monster hunter. In the first hour of the pilot, while tracking a young boy with strange and deadly abilities, Magnus encounters a young psychiatric resident named Will Zimmerman (Robin Dunne), whose talent and open-mindedness make him an attractive candidate for a protege. Soon enough Will is caught up in Magnus’ terrifying yet fascinating world — from which there is, of course, no turning back. We also meet Magnus’ headstrong yet valiant daughter, Ashley, who learns a terrible truth about her mother’s past.

The second hour of the pilot introduces a new trio of (possibly) supernatural guests to the Sanctuary as well as a challenge for Ashley in the wake of the events in hour one.

How does the budget of Sanctuary compare to a TV show? And how has that affected your storytelling?
The budget for Sanctuary is as high if not higher than most internationally-recognized sci fi TV series. It was produced by the same people who make SG-1 and Atlantis. Many of the same producers (myself, Martin Wood, John Smith, George Horie), most of the same crew. Only difference is we put together our own VFX team, as farming out the massive amount of 3-D modeling and rendering would have easily doubled our budget. The only effect on my story telling is that I now have a far bigger palette to work from, seeing as I can set scenes virtually anywhere. That’s the beauty of green screen. We can be in London in 1888 or on a trecherous island off Scotland or moving through a city that doesn’t exist. Anything is possible. That’s a lot of power. I intend to wield it recklessly, of course. ; )

What’s the business model? How are you planning to make your money back?
Sanctuary will employ a simple pay-per-download or subscription model. As a company, our costs are significantly lower than say Warner Bros or Sony Television (we don’t have massive soundstages or plush offices to fund) so we don’t need to sell many millions of downloads in order to be viable (although, hey, millions of downloads would be nice). There will be no advertising – at least not initially. We may explore some creative ad models with companies we like and find entertaining and seamless ways to integrate their products into the show. But nothing gauche or obvious or obtrusive.

You’ve chosen to film Sanctuary in tapeless HD. How has that affected the production pipeline?
It’s made it cheaper, faster and easier to shoot and post the show. We spend less time rendering and transferring media. And we get to see exactly how each shot will look in HD as we edit, composit and render scenes. Many companies were shocked we went this way. But it is the way the world is going and we’ve had no real complaints. The future is friendly!

Which media will Sanctuary be released in? Do you have any confirmed non-web sales yet?
Sanctuary will be available for download or streaming in multiple HD formats. We are exploring other, more traditional forms of distribution (TV and DVD) to be made available after we premiere on the ‘net. We realize there are many people out there with old computers, dial up connections, or who simply prefer to watch the show on TV or DVD. We want as many people as possible to enjoy the show. I know that sounds like hype, but I strongly believe Sanctuary is an accessible-enough series to warrant a wider audience beyond Web — while still giving our online fanbase the interactivity they want from new media.

A TV show structure is defined by the act breaks. Sanctuary is designed to air in multiple media – how has that affected your story structure?
The structure of Sanctuary is at its core a one hour per story format, edited in four roughly 15 min webisodes for online distribution — not too dissimilar to a four act TV episode, just a little bit longer overall. At some point in the future we may recut the webisodes into single TV hours (44mins). The online versions would of course have extra scenes and takes not available on TV. Plus gaming and other web-based sources of info on the show’s stories.

As a writer, what excites you most about the story of Sanctuary?
I just think it’s a cool story. It blends recognizable elements into a new form. It hopefully has the feel of a good graphic novel, but the visceral excitement of a great-looking video game. Sin City, 300, sections of Sith and Phantom Menace had elements, both visual and dramatic, that showed off the potential of what green screen can offer. We intend to take it to the next level.

As a writer, what excites you most about creating Sanctuary in this new format, rather than realising it as a TV show or film?
The use of virtual sets. The non-linear aspects of writing for online (flash gaming, web assets, etc). The freedom to create a show without the usual constraints of the Studio/Network paradigm. I think once people get over their technophobia, there will be many series done on green screen, and many series done mainly for the web. We’re just crazy enough to go first!

Sanctuary has been designed from the get-go for immersive viewer interactivity. What does that mean? How will this be different to an ordinary TV show?
Without giving away too much, the flash-based player application that is now live (just register on www.sanctuaryforall.com) will be the basis for all sorts of interactivity while watching the show. Flash games, instant messaging, break out moments — all these will be implemented over the first season of the show. And a lot of what we do and why will depend greatly on feedback from our viewers. Which, if you think about it, is the coolest thing of all. A show that listens to its fans could be the biggest innovation we’re employing!

So there you have it. And as of yesterday, you can watch the trailer and title sequence for the series here.

Thoughts?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments