When a Show is Cancelled, You Get to Write the Rest of the Story

by
Scott D. Parker

Well, that sucks.

Whenever my wife and I start watching an older show on streaming, I don’t look the show up on the internet. I don’t want to be spoiled about things the world already knows. For example, when I started watching “Brothers and Sisters,” my wife did look up the show and discovered Rob Lowe departed the series before its end. I just like to keep the watching as pure as possible.

Which can make for a great viewing experience. It can also lead to heartbreak.

We recently watched the Hulu series, “Reboot.” It follows the cast and crew of a fictional 1990s TV show that was cancelled and their attempt to, um, reboot it for the 2020s.

The excellent cast featured three adults and a now grown-up co-star. Keegan-Michael Key is always funny. Judy Greer is stellar in everything she does. This counts as my first show where I watched Johnny Knoxville. Calum Worthy plays the former child actor with an earnestness that might be drawn from real life. And Paul Reiser! The dude is so good and there are moments in this show—especially the final episode—where you are reminded of just how well he can speak and command a scene. Made me want to go back and start a “Mad About You” rematch.

The writing on “Reboot” is spot on, especially as the writers—lead by Rachel Bloom playing Reiser’s daughter—riff on things that made old TV shows funny that would never fly nowadays. And the characters actually had interesting arcs as they came to terms with their life choices and how they live their lives now.

And it’s pretty darn hilarious.

We got to the eighth and final episode…and it ended on various cliffhangers. Each character faced a decision moment, and it left you wondering what path they’d take.

End of the Line

Moments after the credits rolled, I picked up my phone to see when season two would be premiering. Imagine my shock and dismay when I learned that Hulu had cancelled the show. There would not be a season two. That was it.

And it ended with unresolved issues? Seriously? I guess that’s the gamble you take as a writer of a new TV show. Do you ended the first season on a cliffhanger and dare the network to renew the show or do you just end on a happy note in case.

Use the Muppets for Inspiration

Remember the ending of 1979’s “The Muppet Movie”? As the gang was frantically trying to get all the sets prepared to tell the story *of the movie you just watched,* everything came tumbling down. They stare at the destruction and then Kermit breaks the fourth wall and tells us “Life’s like a movie. Write your own ending.”

That’s what we’ll have to do with Reboot. Write our own ending. And I know how I would steer the characters.

Still, despite how it ended, I thoroughly enjoyed Reboot. It’s only eight episode of about thirty minutes each. It’s certainly worth your time. If you do watch it, let me know how you’d keep the story going.

Two Observations on Storytelling: Stephen King and “Unforgotten”

By

Scott D. Parker

 

Two things struck me this week about the power of storytelling and the ability to weave a good tale. The first is not spoilerific—I haven’t finished the novel yet—while the second is very spoiler-heavy. Be warned.

Stephen King’s Billy Summers

I started King’s new novel this week. I’m listening to the audiobook from my local library via the awesome Libby app (y’all’ve got that app, right?). I was an avid reader of King’s novels from about 1987 (when I graduated from high school and entered college) all the way through the late 1990s and into the early 2000s. If he wrote a book, I read it or listened to it.

Somewhen over the 2010s, however, I started slowing. He didn’t, but I did. Don’t really have a reason. It just happened. In fact, the last King book I can remember listening to was Joyland. 

When Billy Summers was published, I decided to give it a try. In the story, Billy Summers is a former sniper now hired killer. He poses as a writer and, knowing those folks who hired him are monitoring his activity on the MacBook they supplied him, Billy begins to write his memoirs.

As soon as I heard that, I rolled my eyes. “Yet another story within a story thing from Stephen King? Really?”

Really.

It’s a thing King has done more than once. It’s particularly effective in Misery, but there are other examples. In that book, the font changed to indicate the story-within-the-story. In the audio of Billy Summers, narrator Paul Sparks slightly changes his voice so you can tell what part of the novel you are listening to.

Being an audiobook, yes, I can fast-forward but I would have no way of knowing when the ‘autobiography’ part stopped and the ‘Billy Summers’ part began. So, I did what the author wanted me to do: I listened.

And dang if the story-within-the-story part became almost as compelling as the main novel. There are whole sections of the story-within-the-story and I found myself really getting into that part. Then it would stop and I’d be reminded about the main story.

As if anyone ever needed any more examples of how good a storyteller Stephen King is, I’ll go ahead and submit this one into evidence. Like his stories or not, think they might be too long or not, you cannot dispute Stephen King is a modern master of the writing craft. I have known that ever since I read my first King novel—Pet Semetary—but I just needed a reminder. I got one this week.

The Ending of Unforgotten, Season 4

[Spoilers, folks]

Here in American, Masterpiece aired episode 6, the finale of Unforgotten, season 4, last Sunday. I’ve written about this BBC series before (how season 4’s opening episode instantly grabbed me) but season 4 did a couple of remarkable things for me.

One involved actor Andy Nyman. Before Unforgotten, I only knew Nyman as the comedic actor he is in Death at a Funeral. He is hilarious in that 2007 Frank Oz film and it took a little bit of time in episode 1 not to think of that funny character every time he appeared on screen. 

But by the finale, I earned a whole new respect for his acting prowess. He was wonderful, nuanced, and my favorite actor outside of the core group.

Speaking of the core group, Nicola Walker and Sanjeev Bhaska play partner who solve cold cases. I’ve written about how much they are a breath of fresh air in detective shows. They’re not raging alcoholics or any of the usual tropes we see in TV cop shows. They are just normal people doing a dirty job the best that they can. They respect each other, but there’s not a hint of “will they or won’t they?’ in their relationship. They are friends and partners who deeply care for a love one another.

So it came as quite a shock to my wife and I as we watched the final moments of episode 5 when Walker’s character, Cassie Stuart, was driving and someone broadsided her car. In the previews of episode 6, we saw her in a hospital bed and all the other characters reacting to the news. We looked at each other and, other than wondering which of the suspects did the deed, wondered how Cassie was going to recover.

Spoiler alert: she didn’t. The character died. 

For older shows (Unforgotten aired on the BBC earlier this year), I do not do any research while I’m watching for the first time. News items can ruin big things that way. So I had no way of knowing what was coming.

It’s not every day when a main character is killed off on a popular TV show. I don’t know the ins and outs of Walker’s contract or any behind-the-scenes stuff so I don’t know why she left. But her leaving enabled a show that features normal people doing a troubling job the opportunity to show how those same normal character deal with the death of a friend and partner and commanding officer. It was stellar. 

The director also made a nice storytelling technique as well: for almost the entire last episode, Walker only appeared in the hospital bed. Only toward the end did we get to see Cassie leave the voice mail her father listens to over and over again, giving us viewers one last look at a beloved character.

And we also got a moving soliloquy from Bhaska’s Sunny. Just as the shock of Cassie’s passing took my breath away, Sunny’s little speech opened the waterworks.

Great storytelling.

The Freedom to Change: The Haunting of Bly Manor

by

Scott D. Parker

Two years ago, Mike Flanagan delivered The Haunting of Hill House, a horror show with a great emotional center I never saw coming. Now, in 2020, we get a spiritual sequel in Bly Manor, and Flanagan has pulled off a wonderful feat: daring to be different.

Unlike Hill House, I kind of predicted Bly Manor would have a nice emotional core. In that, I wasn’t disappointed. It was exactly that and more. But where Hill House was a horror show—complete with mystery and jump scares—Bly Manor dares to be less a horror show but more like an eerie tale of menace.

Loosely based on Henry James’s The Turn of the Screw—a book I’ve never read—Bly Manor is narrated in the present day by Carla Gugino to a small group of people. She tells the story of Danielle Clayton, a young woman who, in 1987, takes a job as the live-in nanny/teacher for a pair of children—Miles and Flora—at Bly Manor, tucked away in the English countryside. Rounding out the small group is the housekeeper (Hannah), the chef (Owen), and the gardener (Jamie).

Oh, and the ghosts.

That’s not a spoiler. It’s what you’d expect from a story taking place in a giant manor house. But who the ghosts are and why they’re there, that’s the mystery.

I’ll admit I haven’t watched Hill House since it debut in 2018 so I cannot remember all the intricacies. But I do remember some of the jump scares and genuinely terrifying moments. I expected that here as well.

Flanagan, however, had a different idea. Instead of manufacturing simple scares just to make viewers jump, he crafted a well-told story over nine episodes (one less than Hill House). The story’s leaner and swifter, pulling you along nicely.

We get a good dose of flashbacks and present-day action doled out in just big enough scoops to make the mystery tantalizing. My wife had recently see a filmed version of The Turn of the Screw so she knew a few plot points going in, but I didn’t. All I did was let the story wash over me.

The actors were stellar. A few of them—Henry Thomas, Victoria Pedretti, Oliver Jackson-Cohen, and Kate Siegel—also starred in Hill House. It was good to see them again. But the newcomers were just as good. Benjamin Evan Ainsworth, who plays Miles, can turn from innocent child into something else on a dime. That was unnerving. Another standout T'Nia Miller who played Hannah the housekeeper. There was always something buried just underneath her skin, and Miller was outstanding at her portrayal, especially episode five. And the scenes where she and Rahul Kohli (who played Owen the chef) interacted were very good.

It was probably around episode three or four that I realized Flanagan was doing something different with this new show. It wasn’t as scary. True, there was a palpable sense of foreboding, but not scary. Initially, I wanted the scares, but then I was content to watch the show he made. The longer the show went on and I finally noted what Flanagan had done, the more impressed by it I was.

Sure, Bly Manor could easily have just been Hill House 2 with even more jump scares and more lurid stuff, but that’s not what he did. He told a different kind of story, and I’m really glad he did. It let us viewers know that for however long he creates stories like this, they won’t just be cookie-cutter shows. They will be distinct stories with a similar, but unique style.

And it makes me even more excited to see what he comes up with next.

The Haunting of Hill House - The Best Thing on Netflix?

By
Scott D. Parker

I never saw this show coming and it totally blew me away.

We live in a golden age of content, especially television content. There is just so much that we can’t realistically be expected to watch it all. Even as an avid Netflix consumer, I didn’t know the re-imagined version of “The Haunting of Hill House” was even a thing. My wife, did, however. She read about it in ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY and then it popped up on her Netflix account. We had just finished Amazon’s brilliant "The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel," it was October, so why not? It was a short, 10-episode series--movie, really--so it wouldn’t take up too much time if it proved to be bad or if I proved indifferent.

All I needed was the first episode.

Specifically, the last minute or so. Well, no, let me backtrack: the steller cast, the adept direction, and the fantastic writing of the first episode got me to swallow the hook. The last couple of minutes set the hook. “I’m in,” were the words out of my mouth as soon as the credits rolled. Truth be told, I was already in.

The Haunting of Hill House, as re-imagined by director/writer Mike Flanagan, tells the story of the Crain family in two different phases of their lives. In flashbacks, we see Hugh Crain (Henry Thomas; yes, that Henry Thomas) and his wife, Olivia (Carla Gugino) move into Hill House with their five children. In the present day, the children are now adults, Hugh is now played by Timothy Hutton, and Olivia isn’t around. The central mystery of the show is what happened to her and to the family at Hill House.

Taking his cue from any number of modern examples of non-linear storytelling, director Flanagan expertly weaves in and out of both times, revealing just enough here while intentionally not showing you something there. I knew what he was doing, and I didn’t care. I became so enthralled in the story and the way it was presented that I came close to the desire to binge it all. The closest we got was two separate days of two episodes each. Most of the time, however, it was an episode per day. But the beauty of watching the show in this manner was the ability to mull over the story and the characters.

And mull it over I did. Numerous nights and even throughout the days, snippets of the show would float back into my head. My wife and I discussed various aspects of the show, and I even played the age-old game of trying to guess what was going to happen next.  Thankfully, I was wrong on nearly everything except one crucial aspect. And, no, I can’t tell you what it was because it is fundamental to the story. (see below)

Billed as a horror show, it lives up to that reputation. Yes, there are jump scares. Of course there are jump scares. But, for me, Hill House was less a horror show than a supernatural suspense, eerie type show. There were some moments in the show that I was glad I was watching in the day time. And most of those are quiet moments you didn’t see coming.

Flanagan--whose work I don’t know--did a marvelous job at directing and pacing. I’m no film geek, but even I realized some of the tricks he used to great effect. One was the just-out-of-range blurring of a background character. He did this often, and it really worked well. Camera movement was pitch perfect. Probably the thing getting the most buzz is episode 6, “Two Storms.” The story content is stellar and pivotal to the series, but the direction is what will earn this episode award nominations. Even as we watched it, we could tell it was shot in multiple long-takes, with the camera moving this way and that, revealing a nothingness behind one character in one second only to reveal something behind the very same character when the camera pulls around again. Excellent work.

An excellent director with an excellent story can only get you so far. If you don’t have excellent actors, you get something sub par. The casing director of Hill House needs an award today. Let’s start with Henry Thomas. Seeing as I didn’t look up or know anything about this show ahead of time, it was during the first episode I realized he was the “E.T.” kid. I haven’t followed his career at all, but man did he deliver in the various flashback scenes. The chemistry Thomas has with Gugino and the five child actors is so good, you’d think they were a real family. Speaking of Gugino, she had the difficult task of conveying Olivia as a loving mother and wife, but as someone also haunted by things not often visible, sometimes even in the same scene. When she was comforting a scared child, she was honest and sincere. When she was facing something else, she was just as scared as you were in that moment.

In any movie starring kids, you might get less-than-good actors who deliver less-than-good performances. The five children--especially Julian Hilliard (young Luke) and McKenna Grace (as young Theodora)--gelled on screen as if they were truly siblings. They really inhabited their characters well. Not to be outdone, the adult actors playing these characters also knocked it out of the park. There was one scene in particular where Theodora--who has a special talent--does the thing she does to use her talent (like how I’m obfuscating?). With modern technology and CGI chicanery, Flanagan could have conjured up anything for a scary moment. Instead, he lets Kate Siegel’s face be centered on the screen. When she “sees” what she sees, Siegel screams a scream so bloodcurdling your mind is the thing conjuring up the horror. So well done.

I questioned why Flanagan didn’t just put Henry Thomas in older make up but rather cast Timothy Hutton as the older Hugh. Visually, the two actors are not too far off, and stylistically, they created mannerisms for Hugh each actor mimicked. But in keeping with the obvious recasting of the kids, the choice for a second actor for Hugh was a good one. I’m not too familiar with Hutton’s work, but as the series propelled itself to the end, his gravitas carried his scenes and I was ultimately satisfied with both actors playing the same part.

Oh, one other thing about the cast: each one of them get what I call a “Robert Shaw in Jaws” moment. You know the scene in Jaws where Shaw, as Quint, tells the story of the U.S.S. Indianapolis and the sharks. Best dang scene in the movie. Well, the adults get their version, but none was better than of Robert Longstreet as caretaker Horace Dudley. When he says what he says in the manner he does it, Flanagan keeps the camera on Longstreet. The actor delivers that story with so much depth and emotion that I immediately called it a “Robert Shaw in Jaws” moment. Incredible that a piece of a show like this by a side character could be so compelling.

I could go on and on, but I'm going to halt here. I’ve seen some great stuff this year, but The Haunting of Hill House is easily in the Top 3, maybe even Top 2. I cannot recommend it highly enough.

P.S., I’m stopping the main review here. If you want to avoid spoilers, stop and watch then return. For those of y’all who want to continue, you’ve been warned.

-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The one aspect of the show I did see coming was Episode 5, “The Bent Neck Lady.” At that moment, I nearly thought the secret of the house was an alternate dimension.

What I didn’t see coming was the ending.

Holy moley. Who in the world saw it coming? Who in the world would have predicted the ending of a showed billed as a horror show could have such a genuinely emotional ending? I don’t know about y’all, but I was bawling my eyes out when Hugh--first as Hutton then as Thomas--talked to Steve and explained the situation. He told his son why and how the house needed to be saved. And then the instant transition from Hutton to Thomas? Lost it. My wife did, too. Maybe it’s my age, maybe I’m just so emotional about family, but The Haunting of Hill House delivered not only genuine scares, creeps, and thrills, but also a deep, heartfelt emotionally resonant ending. I couldn’t be happier about it.

The Killing: Seasons 3 and 4

By
Scott D. Parker

I recently finished watching the Seasons 3 and 4 of The Killing and I got to wondering something: Why do sequels typically go darker than the first?

What makes The Killing interesting is that it started dark and went even darker. Seasons 1 and 2 focuses on a single story (and I flat-out loved it). Seasons 3 and 4 has a common overarching story arc but two cases-of-the-season. Season 3 goes almost full dark from the get-go. It involves the street kids of Seattle and someone who is hunting and killing them. Add to that two characters in Detectives Linden and Holder who already battle their own demons and you’ve not exactly got a joy-filled show. I’ll admit that a few times during the ten episodes I was like “Really? They’re going there?” Yeah, they went there.

Holder is the one character who can turn on and off the charm on a dime. One moment he was jabbing street talk with other characters in his most charming way and the next he’s staring out a window, pondering death. Linden starts season 1 sad and barely rises to a smile. It’s oppressive, to be honest, and it acted as a damper on all of Season 3.

Which is a shame because the most compelling character was Peter Sarsgaard, who plays a man on death row…and Linden helped put him there. He is fantastic, and he frankly steals just about every scene he’s in. As depressing as Season 3 gets, I’d still recommend it…

…Except the last minute. Ugh! Something happens in that last minute of the season 3 finale that aggravated me and propelled the story into Season 4. The case-of-the-season in Season 4 was the brutal murder of a rich family and the only survivor is the teen-aged son three months away from graduating from a military school. If you thought Season 3 had some dark moments, Season 4 went even darker. There are moments that are downright disturbing, enough to make you shift in your chair. Tyler Ross plays the surviving son and he does a phenomenal job with his role. Joan Allen is, however, the star of this season, playing the principal/superintendent of the school. She commands the screen whenever she’s on it with her steely gaze and firm jaw line. The more the aftereffects of Season 3 played on our two detectives, the more I enjoyed Allen’s scenes.

The denouement is one I partly saw coming, odd considering the conclusion of seasons 1 and 2 I didn’t see coming at all. It didn’t detract that much, but it is still surprising. One of the things I commented about to my wife was that The Killing is that particular show that turns the viewers against its lead characters. Not in a big way, but there were a few times when I just wanted to slap them around and make them straighten up.

Then there is the epilogue. I’m still trying to determine if I liked it or not. One the one hand, when I watched it, I had a smile on my face. On the other, it might have seemed too trite. But I certainly understand the point that show runner and creator Veena Sug was after: you find your home wherever you find it, sometimes in the most unlikely of places.

If you read my review of Seasons 1 and 2—especially the length of it—you might question why I’m summing up sixteen episodes in 500 words. Frankly it is because Seasons 1 and 2, all one story, was so utterly compelling and consuming that the writers had a tall order to even match how great that first story is. And it ended in such a way to suggest that the story was done and finished, but the network decided it had a hit on their hands and renewed the show for another season.

It brought to mind the TV show “Castle,” still one of my all-time favorites. When the show runners didn’t know if the series would be cancelled at the end of Season 7, they provided an ending which was tear-inducing, warm, and great. When Season 8 was announced, I was overjoyed. What could be better than more Castle? Well, the answer was mediocre Castle.

Same thing here. I’m almost tempted to tell people to watch Seasons 1 and 2 of The Killing and walk away. My wife, the one responsible for me watching the show in the first place, disagrees, saying the finale and epilogue allow the characters some closure. I see her point and I certainly agree with it considering I watched all four seasons…

…But there’s still a part of me that says the first 26 episodes of The Killing are some of the best television I have ever watched. The next 16…not so much. They are good and there are some incredible moments in Seasons 3 and 4, but none approaching the heartbreaking moments of episode 1. Heck, that one episode is better than any single episode in Seasons 3 and 4.

I’m glad I watched all the episodes and, as a whole, still consider The Killing among the best crime shows I’ve ever seen. But there’s still part of me that wants to caution folks about the dichotomy of seasons 1/2 and 3/4. Heck, the more distance from the series finale of Castle, the more I tell new viewers to stop at the Season 7 finale. I’m pretty sure the more time I get from The Killing, I’ll tell people something similar about Seasons 1 and 2. Stop when you're ahead.


Have you ever had a show like this?

Castle: All Good Things..

By

Scott D. Parker

I can't think of another situation like this where many longtime fans of the TV show CASTLE are happy, albeit bittersweet, about its cancellation.

On Tuesday, I wrote how I was dreading this season’s finale because of all the behind-the-scene shenanigans regarding the firing of co-lead Stana Katic and Tamala Jones. I lamented the inevitable way Katic’s character, Captain Kate Beckett, would have to be written out of the show: her death. I even had my failsafe way to assuaging the anger I knew I was going to feel this coming Monday: re-watch the Season 7 finale.

But now, all that is moot. On Thursday, ABC cancelled Castle.

For me, Castle was one of my all-time favorite shows. Ever since the promo to the series aired back in 2009, I was hooked. Part of it was Nathan Fillion. C’mon! But the other part was the concept. A bestselling writer teaming up with a tough lady cop? Banter that hearkened back not only to “Moonlighting” but Nick and Nora Charles? What’s not to like?

I not only liked it. I loved it. Passionately. In an interesting bit of timing, my family was selected by the Arbitron folks to wear this little pager-like devices that would monitor what we watched and listened to on the radio. “CSI: Miami” aired Mondays at 9pm, but so did Castle. And, since the monitors didn’t pick up VCR recording, we watched Castle live (and taped CSI: Miami). I’d like to think that my family helped in the ratings during that first 10-episode season.

The chemistry between Fillion and Katic was present from the beginning. Charm oozed from them both. They were so good together. I watched each and every episode with a goofy grin on my face. My wife enjoyed the show, too. I’d tell everyone about it and why they should give it a try. It was a rare instance when a friend would come back and say, “That’s not the show for me.”

Even though Fillion and Katic were the central crux of the show, the entire ensemble deserves high praise. Jon Huertas and Seamus Dever, as Detectives Esposito and Ryan, became inseparable and indispensable as the show continued. Together, they formed a unique team, the likes of which are rare on network TV: co-stars that belong together. As I wrote back in 2011 during my recap of the season 3 finale, “If there was an Emmy Award for Best Co-Star Team, Huertas and Dever should be nominated annually.” Molly Quinn, who played Castle’s teenaged daughter, literally grew up before our eyes. Her special chemistry with Fillion was so good you’d be forgiven for believing they really were father and daughter. Susan Sullivan, Martha Rodgers, Castle’s mom, usually played her role for laughs and conflict, but she brought decades of experience to the show and always was a welcome addition to any episode. Early on, Ruben Santiago-Hudson played Captain Montgomery, Beckett’s commanding officers. He brought gravitas to the prescient as well as heartfelt courage when his character sacrificed himself for Beckett. That he was replaced by Penny Johnson Jerald as Captain Gates was wonderful casting and helped keep the show’s conflict afloat. Together, all these wonderful actors—and so many more—created something so much more than the mere sum of the parts.

The writing on the show, created by Andrew Marlowe, started strong and kept up the momentum. It’s a rare serious show that can do comedy well. “The X-Files” was good at that. But it’s also the rare lighthearted show that can craft such deeply emotional and serious episodes. This is where Castle excelled. I wrote about Castle at lot over the years, and more than one time, I commented that they should have just changed the name of the show to “Beckett.” She grounded the show. Her emotional arc is the through line of the entire series. The overall investigation into her mother’s murder gave the show heft and showed, that even when life jars your and knocks you off your planned trajectory, you have to right yourself. Katic breathed so much life into Beckett. She portrayed the police detective not only as a strong, capable, modern woman, but also one that had to overcome life when life broke down the walls she built. She is an incredible actress and she did such a stunning job at playing the part written and tailored to her.

Speaking of writing, I can’t think of another show with as much meta-stuff as Castle. That the good folks at ABC decided to actually publish real books featuring Nikki Heat and slap Fillion’s face on the back cover was inspired. Brilliant! I absolutely loved them all. They were great to read in real time as Rook and Heat (Castle and Beckett’s doppelgangers in the novels) got together early on. And a big shout out to Johnny Heller who narrated the first four novels. His voice and cadence so closely matched Fillion’s it was like “Richard Castle” was narrating his own book.

And so it ends. As I wrote on Facebook, I actually have mixed feelings about the cancellation. I know it would have to end sometime. There were times in this final season where even I could tell the show wasn’t reaching the heights it had in past seasons. But I still loved it. Passionately. Fervently. It was perfectly suited to my nerdy, geeky, writerly wheelhouse. That it went from a gimmicky show about a nerdy writer and his muse to an incredibly deep one that showed the blossoming of a real romance amidst the uncertain times of the early 21st Century is remarkable. I will dearly miss it and my "I don't answer the phone Mondays at 9pm" time. Heck, if you throw in CSI: Miami which started in 2002, I’ve had a 9pm Monday show for 14 years!

Before the cancellation news broke, I had my fail safe backup plan in light of Beckett’s inevitable death: I was going to rewatch the season 7 finale. In that episode, the writers buttoned up the entire series with a smiling cast and wonderful, heartfelt words. I have since learned that they filmed two different endings for this season’s finale, the one where Beckett most likely died and the happy one. Let’s hope the editor gets it correct! It looks like we’ll get our closure ending. It looks like we’ll have our sad, yet happy tears. 

But, most of all, CASTLE will end the way it started. With two characters, Richard Castle and Kate Beckett, two people from different worlds who found each other, discovered in the other person that which they themselves lacked, withstood the hardships of life, fell in love, and got married. In so many love stories, there’s the “and they lived happily ever after” line. The implication is that life will always be smiles. That’s not the case. What the romance of Castle and Beckett showed, time and time again, is that life throws obstacles in their paths, but together, they can overcome anything. That they are stronger together than apart.

And we are all happier for all the joy that CASTLE has brought to our lives. Together, we have experienced our lives together, cast, crew, and fans. No matter what life threw in our way, we always knew that, come Monday nights, we can see our TV friends and they’ll bring a smile to our faces.

Man! I so loved this show!

It’s easy, now, to write “There’ll never be another show like it,” but there likely will be. After all, some folks characterized Castle as a new Moonlighting. But the next show that tries to do what CASTLE did will have an incredibly high bar to reach, to say nothing of surpass.

So, come Monday, we will get our happy ending. And Castle and Beckett (and us) can end this wonderful relationship in the only way possible.

Together.

Always.

P. S., I just re-watched the series premiere Everything we love is there, right from the beginning. It was like Marlowe and company created this show from whole cloth and the subsequent years only refined its flavor. Truly a one-of-a-kind program.

Quality or Quantity: Which is More Important

by
Scott D. Parker

I saw this image on Facebook yesterday and it gave me quite the chuckle. I am, like a millions others, an avid Downton Abbey fan and have been since the first episode. The quality of the writing and acting to say nothing of the sumptuous costumes and sets sweep me away to a time I never knew. And the characters! Mr. Bates. Lady Mary. Carson the butler. In the hours I watch these two seasons I am lost to the modern world. Nary a telephone call is received in my house when Downton Abbey airs. Be ye warned.

When I mention "seasons," we Americans typical think about 20 to 24 hour long episodes. In fact, when one of my favorite shows gets an order for an extra episode or two, I count myself lucky. From September to May, I can count on nearly nine months of new episodes that make an American season of television. Naturally, not every episode is great, but you get a steady dose of your favorite characters each and every week. And, when sweeps months break, you get the "special episodes" which are often very good.

Not so with the British or, at least, the British material I see on this side of the ocean. Be it Prime Suspect, Foyle's War, or Downton Abbey, the British version of a season is vastly different. Foyle's War typically was three to five 90-minute episodes, movies really. Same for Prime Suspect. I'm not sure how Downton Abbey was broadcast in England, but here in America, PBS showed the second season over six Sundays, with a couple of evenings showing two hours to the usual one. Where the typical season of CSI: Miami lasts from September to May, we Downton Abbey fans had to content ourselves with a few glorious weeks in the winter of 2012. But oh the quality of the shows!

I would love to profess my love of quality over quantity, but I have to admit that I like both. And it all depends on the show. For something like Castle, CSI: Miami, Grimm, or Body of Proof, I want my morsel each and every week. I like knowing that, for an hour on one of these nights, I can sit back and enjoy some good television. But every now and then, I'll easily take fewer episodes of a great show like Downton Abbey because everything else about the show makes up for it. (Truth be told, I'd love to see what it's like to have 24 episodes of Downton just to see if its specialness would be diminished.)

Which way is do you prefer? Do you like the American way of a season (24 episodes, delivered weekly, with sometimes varying quality) or the British method (fewer episodes, greater quality)?

A Slice of Pie

by
Scott D. Parker

You ever wonder why "The Wire" aired on HBO? Can you even imagine that show as a mainstream network television program? Nah, me neither. But here's the thing: I enjoy both.

I'm no expert, but The Wire seems to be the closest thing to real police work done on film. This past week, in doing research for my current book, I interviewed an HPD officer. I mentioned The Wire. Sure, he'd seen it and confirmed, in his opinion, that it was pretty close to the real thing. I asked him about jurisdictional tension--with HPD and among other organizations--and he pretty much confirmed what you see on TV: different departments get into a pissing contest at the drop of a hat.

For as engrossing as The Wire is, writing a novel or filming a TV show or movie that shows actual police as it's really done would be bo-ring. The officer kind of agreed with that, too, as I laid out my ideas for my story. Thus, you have to make cop stories filled with tension and excitement. Naturally, you veer off from the real to the fictional, from true sensibilities to the mainstream.

Is that a bad thing? I say no. A. Lee Martinez, SF author, wrote a piece yesterday in which he said that superhero comic books could learn a thing or two from superhero movies. The movies, Martinez wrote, have to appeal to a mainstream audience while the comics need only appeal to the "choir," er, comic book readers. It's rare when a comic book makes the mainstream news. It's usually for big events--death of a character (Superman, Captain America, Spider-Man)--or something like the upcoming relaunch of the DC titles. The general public might buy the one issue, but they likely won't return the following month. Why? I think comics have become too niche.

Same is true for crime stories, print and otherwise. The Wire, for all its accolades, is a rare tale that is true to its source material and beloved by critics. There are a lot of viewers who liked the show, but, of all the folks I know, only two have seen it. I don't think it's a good mainstream type show. It's niche.

There's nothing wrong with mainstream if you know what it is. The Wire was brilliant. My favorite TV show now? "Castle." The finale last season had me riveted. Same for "CSI: Miami." I enjoyed "Body of Proof" and "Harry's Law" and will return for a new season. The original "CSI" is getting a face lift by way of Ted Danson. I watched CSI from the get-go, but faded away last season. I didn't like the turn the show took. Wasn't to my liking. Now, with Danson, I'll give it another look. Some folks are grumbling that CSI is getting too light. Hey. That may be what is necessary to get more viewers.

I enjoy mainstream shows. How, might you ask? I turn off my brain. True, I'll comment on something if it's really egregious or predict a plot point a half hour ahead of time, but I try not to do that too much. My wife prefers it that way. It ruins the enjoyment of what's being presented: a nice slice of mainstream pie.

We writers get our ideas from all over the place. And we truly never turn our writer brains off completely. But said brains get in the way sometimes. Yes, David Caruso delivering his lines is cheesy. Yes, James Patterson's books tend to be the same kind of story over and over again (so I've heard). But that's the way mainstream is. We can accept it, or just get mad at it. The problem with getting mad is that we become more niche.

Does anyone else want a slice of pie?

Book of the Week: The Gentlemen's Hour by Don Winslow. I just started this sequel to The Dawn Patrol (my favorite book from 2008) and am immediately loving it. The lingo, the vibe of Southern California permeates every word in this book, and it makes me want to return to San Diego. That's out of the cards, but a return to the companionship of Boone Daniels and his buddies is money.

EBOOKS, SELF-PUBLISHING, --PUBLISHING IS CHANGING--WE HAVE TO CHANGE WITH IT!!!

by Dave White

Stop.

Take a deeeeeeeeeeeeeeep breath.

Are you a published author? Are you someone who wants to be a published author? Do you have an idea, a concept, an outline, fifty typed pages? Do you know every in and out of the publishing world, the promotional ideas, and what you're going to do when you get that book deal?

Stop.

Forget it all. Take all that stuff about a changing world and put in your back pocket and save it for later.

Seriously.

Write the book.

Bury your head in the sand. Forget what all the blogs are talking about (EVEN THIS ONE) and write you book. Write the best damn book you can. Revise it until your eyes bleed. Revise until your fingers are numb.

Worry about what's in the book. Are you writing what you want to read? Good.

What gets lost in all these blogs on the publishing industry that writers read is the book itself. It is so easy to put the cart before the horse. Yeah, when you HAVE A BOOK DONE you want to figure out the best way to get it in front of an audience. You want to know if there are going to be publishers out there to put it in front of readers.

But remember, at this stage of the game, YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE A FINISHED BOOK. You have an idea, some pages, and a "favorite places" list full of blog posts.

Write your book. Enjoy the process.

Seriously.

I'm LATE!

by Dave White

Sorry, I'm about 7 hours late posting my latest Do Some Damage entry... but I have good reason.

See, some things are clicking writing wise, and when that happens, I kind of drift off an forget some of my responsibilities.

I'm about fifty pages into my fourth book and also putting the finishing touches on the revisions of my third book. So my brain is all over the place.

Part of me is wondering about the layout of Glen Ridge, NJ and how certain emergency personnel respond to things.

The other part of me is worrying if I'm telling not showing, and do I need to revise that sentence?

And my brain is funny, it doesn't focus on one of those items until the situation revolves itself...it goes back and forth and back and forth and back and forth. It keeps me from focusing on things I should be doing (like cleaning my room or making coffee or writing my Do Some Damage post.)

But once I figure out the answer... it's like a muscle releasing after being tensed for a long time. Everything relaxes, I'm easy going... and then I remember all the stuff I have to do...

(Plus, seeing Weddle tweet this morning reminded me I had to write a post...)

Good thing I'm on Spring Break or you would have seen this post at about 4 in the afternoon.

Anyone else have their writing or reading experiences completely distract them?

Two Posts for the Price of One

In lieu of a longer, one-themed approach, I’m opting for two shorter ones today.

Sgt. Pepper Moments

On Wednesday, my colleague, John McFetridge, wrote a fantastic article about a Sgt. Pepper Moment he and the other writers for his show, “The Bridge,” had earlier this year (and get a load of the kick-ass trailer for "The Bridge). As they were writing episodes for “The Bridge,” another cop show, “Southland,” premiered and challenged them in new and unique ways. The entire post is well worth reading.

I got to thinking about my own Sgt. Pepper Moments. These would be moments in my life where I experienced something that completely changed an aspect of my life. I’m not going down the ultimate Sgt. Pepper Moment (being a dad), but, rather, staying on topic with mystery and crime fiction. As I wrote in my bio for this blog, I’m a late comer to the crime fiction genre. I’m here because of a Sgt. Pepper moment. I can state it in two words: Mystic River. Up until its publication, I rarely gave mysteries a glance. Heck, I didn’t even realize there was a distinction between “mystery fiction” and “crime fiction.”

That changed in 2001. After listening to an NPR interview (you'll need RealPlayer to hear it) with author Dennis Lehane, I decided to give the book a try. It rocked my world. I had no idea that a book--a *mystery* book--could be so profound. It changed the course of my reading and my interests. It spoke to me in ways I didn’t know existed. I’ve read it three times now, and I return to it when I need to be reminded how a modern master of storytelling demonstrates his craft.

What are your Sgt. Pepper Moments that got you to start reading mystery and crime fiction?

CSI and the Case of the Recurring Story Line

I have watched CSI on Thursday nights since the beginning. Yeah, Grissom’s gone but Sara’s back...again (Jorja Fox, the Brett Farve of television?). It’s almost back to normal. But there’s a new twist in this season’s storytelling. Have you picked up on it? In the premiere, there was Main Case (the lady in the traffic accident) but there was also the John Doe who arrived at the ME. For the bulk of the show, I expected the John Doe to relate (miraculously!) to the Main Case. The episode ended without a link. Hot dog, I thought, are the writers actually going to have a thread that runs through more than one show?

Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy and appreciate the Crime of the Week, but lots of times, I want the longer, deeper mystery ("The Wire" anyone?). Come episode two, John Doe made another appearance...and he still wasn’t solved. Way to go, writers. Heck, the closing scene of the program all but indicated something very peculiar going on in the Vegas crime lab. I have my suspicions about Lawrence Fishburne’s character (my wife doesn’t share them). We’ll see how it turns up. Suffice it to day, what CSI has started doing this season is making me want to tune in. In book speak, it’s making me want to turn the pages. Fast.

Are y’all liking CSI so far this year? Do you like their approach to the storytelling? If not, what mystery/cop show do you like and why?

P.S. Coffee

This weekend only, Starbucks is launching it's new instant coffee, Via, in stores. You can go and take a taste test and see if you can identify the instant coffee vs. the brewed coffee. I could smell the difference and the taste was just further evidence. My reward (and yours if you try it): a coupon for a free cuppa joe. For instant, Via was not all that bad, easily the best tasting instant coffee I've ever had. Still, I'm a brew man, myself. But I can't wait for that next camping trip...

Writing for TV

by John McFetridge

Okay, a while ago I said it was a bad idea to write a screenplay because after all that work you’re left with a document that has little value on its own. Very few movies are made from original screenplays and once the screenplay has made the rounds there’s nothing left. Even if it’s a low budget indie, it’ll still take a lot of people to turn into a movie whereas a manuscript can keep going to smaller and smaller publishers or you can even publish it yourself or just put it on a blog for almost no money.

Now I’m going to tell you why writing a TV spec script is a good idea even though there isn’t any market for it at all.

I love writing for television. I’ve only done it once and I may very well never do it again, but it was a great experience and I’m very grateful to have had it. I’m a social guy, I like collaborating. The one thing about novels that I don’t like is how solitary the whole process is. TV writing is teamwork.

Plus, a lot of the best writing being done these days is for TV. I can’t find many novels as satisfying as The Sopranos or The Wire or even Mad Men (actually that’s less true these days as more and more really good novels are published. There aren’t very many private eyes on TV and very few TV shows feature the bad guys as the main character the way I like. But still...)

So, you may want to write for TV. And, if you’re going to try and do that, you’re going to have to write a spec script. That is, a script for a show that’s already on the air. You do this to show you can write other people’s characters and use an already established structure (I like to say structure rather than formula – one of my co-writers on The Bridge said that writing for TV was like writing Haiku – very structured. You could also say it’s like writing dirty limericks, but that’s not as classy).

But you can’t write a spec script for the show you want to write for. They can’t read it. Who knows, they may have a similar storyline in the pipeline already. On The Bridge we had dozens of stories we didn’t get to in the first season. We did get spec scripts submitted. They were for Law and Order:SVU or Flashpoint, things like that.

Back when I applied to the Prime Time TV Writing Program at the Canadian Film Centre my spec script was for NYPD Blue. It was challenging and I didn’t get it right, but it did give me a much better understanding of the show and started me on the road to learning to write TV (I still have a lot of road to cover).

Once you get on a TV show the process is also highly structured and this guy recently wrote terrific series of blog entries explaining it all. No need to reinvent the wheel, this is the internet afterall, so I’ll just link to it.

TV writing part one: Setting the Table.

Part Two: The Outline.

Part Three: The First Draft.

Part Four: The Second Draft.

Part Five: Production White and Beyond.