The Nikkster's site informs us that new prime time animation is on the horizon.
The Office and Parks & Recreation executive producer Greg Daniels is teaming with a writer from each of his two NBC series to develop new animated comedy projects for the network. ...
First question: Will these be done under a WGA contract, no contract, or a TAG contract? (I'm guessing that it will be a Writers Guild collective bargaining agreement, since these are Writers Guild members were talking about here. But you never know. Never under-estimate the persuasive powers of our fine, entertainment conglomerates.)
Second question: Is there going to be an artist or three in the mix? Because prime time shows created by cartoonists and artists (along with a writer) have much higher success rates than ones solely created by writers.
Third question: What studio is going to be doing the boarding, designing, and production work? When we find out where it is, we'll run down there and work to organize the artists. (Because everyone needs to be warm and snuggly under a seamless cloak of benefits.)
Posts
14 comments:
**Because prime time shows created by cartoonists and artists (along with a writer) have much higher success rates than ones solely created by writers.**
Careful. You'll get Steve Marmel mad at you.
Maybe. But I'm just citing what has happened over the last eight years. The MacFarlane shows. The Groening shows. All still on the air.
The others? Not so much.
Boy, they all think making cartoons is just so easy, don't they?
Steve Hulett understates question two. The success rate of animated series that are created by writers/comedians alone, and then have character designers and animators brought in to execute the show, have a nearly 100% failure rate.
There's a decent failure rate with any cartoon series, even if cartoonists and artists are the creators, but the only major success have had at least one animator/cartoonist as a primary driver involved from day one.
As the last poster said, it sure looks easy, but it's not. If Daniels is smart, he'll team up with a couple of talented animators/cartoonists. That way he might have a chance to avoid embarrassing himself.
Sounds like that boat has already sailed...
Sadly, yes. Everyone who has success in live action is sure that they're smarter and more talented than the sad sacks who settled for animation, and they're always sure then can waltz in and magic will happen. Their entries into animation are always well publicized. When their show is cancelled after 3 episodes, they take it off their resume and pretend it never happened.
Boy, they all think making cartoons is just so easy, don't they?
Well actually Greg Daniels would know. He was a writer on The Simpsons and was the co-executive producer/co-showrunner on King of the Hill for many years.
Doesn't matter.
Those "producers" and "show runners" are all pretty much just joke writers who's main influence is 'The Daily Show.' They're mostly just former stand-up comics or Harvard grads who are out of touch with what it actually means to tell a story effectively.
Very few of them have studies broadcasting or film, which is why their scripts are always 57 pages too long.
A lot of these shows happen because execs don't know anything and couldn't spot talent if it was grafted onto them with stitches, so they go to whoever is available that used to be a "show runner" from whatever show was/is a hit and assume that they'll be able to make the same magic. Almost never happens.
And these "show-runners" and "producers" all think that they've got the midas touch, and they picture themselves getting as rich as Seth and Matt by cashing in on this "...dopey cartoon trend..."
Good luck.
Wow -- no writers have even said anything and you're all dumping on them. (By the way, Marmel is extremely respectful of artists.) Let me just suggest that the converse is true as well: artist-driven shows that eschew writers (and I don't include shows like "Spongebob" or "Powerpuff Girls," where the artists are also very talented writers, or work from outlines written by writers) are generally lousy and will fail. They're very prettyand/or full of kick-ass action, but just lay there. Samurai Jack was gorgeous, hypnotic, beautiful...and boring as hell. I could name more, but that's a nice high-profile one with which you may now pillory me with yor insults.
"study broadcasting"??? So that's where I can learn to write funny animation scripts! And if that doesn't work out, maybe I can become a weather girl!
Wow, that guy sure schooled me. After all, sitcoms are known for their terrible stories while daytime cartoons are known for their amazing memorable storytelling.
I think artists are necessary to the process. I also think writers are necessary to the process.
Many artists write. Fewer writers draw.
Wow -- no writers have even said anything and you're all dumping on them.
I'm responsible for a couple of the comments above, and I know for sure I didn't dump on writers. What I said (and Steve said, and others who know what's going on have said) is that Greg Daniels is going about developing a show all wrong.
He should have asked from day one, 'Who is my Matt Groening, who is my Mike Judge, who is my animator/cartoonist who can partner with me to shape the look and behavior of these characters and this show WHILE we're developing the premise?' Daniels was involved in two successful prime time animated series. He should know better.
Success also depends heavily on the network side, but it doesn't look good. It does appear that the ship has already sailed, with all the major expensive money deals done in traditional network fashion. Animation appears to be the afterthought here. So, yes - where's the cartoonist?
"Oh, right, you mean the character design worker? Oh, that's easy, we just tell the guy with the pencil what we want him draw then he goes and draws it,right?...right?"
Post a Comment