From: kanamori@csd-d-3.Stanford.EDU (Atsushi Kanamori)
Subject: Re: TNG script guidelines (was Re: horse's stardates)
Originator: kanamori@csd-d-3.Stanford.EDU
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organizatoin
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 03:13:41 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.163228.11844@hellgate.utah.edu> jwindley%asylum.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley) writes:
>eisimps@cie.uoregon.edu (Eileen Simpson) writes:
>>If you are thinking of submitting a script, they suggest these guidelines
>>to have the best chance of selling.
>
>Eileen notes that the following restrictions are designed to keep
>costs down, and this is very true.  But some others seem designed to
>be purely arbitrary restrictions on the subject matter.  No wonder we
>keep getting vanilla scripts and completely predictable plot lines
>with cardboard characters.  The restrictions leave you with a gamut
>from A to B.
>
>>AVOID (or NO):
>
>>-Stories that rely on lots of action or special effects.
>
>Translation: "We don't want to pay for stuntmen or effects."  Stuntmen
>are expensive.  I'm not saying that they don't deserve it, but there
>are more union problems here as well.  Even for "simple" stunts you
>have to pay big bucks, when your principal could probably handle it
>with nominal preparation.
>
>All of this has looming over it the specter of insurance.  As soon as
>you do something even the least bit dangerous, insurance premiums
>skyrocket.
>
>Heaven forbid we should have any action or other excitement.

Actually, if you rephrase this as "the story should stand on its own,
even without the action and FX", it's something I'll support even if the
motive is economical. Though it does make me wonder how "Power Play" got
through...

>
>>-Stories based on earlier stories or characters.
>>-Stories depending on a prior relationship.
>
>This is sort of obscure.  The reason for this is that a viewer should
>be able to tune in to any episode at random without having seen any
>others and be reasonably assured of following the story.  This is just
>a convention of television production.

And one of the primary reasons why I pay so little attention to
broadcast TV. 




>>-Stories about the guest star, not the cast.
>
>This is just plain dumb.  There isn't any financial justification for
>this.  They just don't want to offend the egos of the principal cast.
>Guest stars are there because THAT particular story relies on their
>presence.

Agreed. Of course, their paranoia is probably justified since my top
5 favorite TNG characters almost certainly *were* guest stars...

I also suspect this is the *real* reason behind those damnable ship-in-danger
subplots...


>But the real stupidity lies in the fact that a LOT of TNG episodes
>have a prominent guest star, and the story revolves around that guest
>star and not the cast.

But of course, some psuedo sci-fi menace will come along to give the
regulars something to do.


>>-Stories that could be on any other drama (drugs, AIDS, Divorce...)
>
>I can understand a rationale which attempts to place TNG in a
>different genre of television show, but the fact remains that
>successful fiction relies on people addressing their problems, and
>that people from all times and all places have certain problems in
>common.

If they do *good* stories, I don't care if it could be done on some
other show (the fact that I don't watch any other show might have something
to do with this.) 

On the other hand, there is something to be said for trying to keep
a unique edge.


>
>>-Stories without a personal aspect.
>
>This is covered by the above diatribe.  Science fiction falls flat on
>its face if the fiction is subservient to the science.  The science
>should provide a venue for the fiction, but not BE the fiction.
>
>I think this is a reasonable guideline.

Yep.



>>-Stories about the supernatural, swords & socery.
>
>This seems odd.  Apparently they are trying to keep TNG "down to
>earth," so to speak.  But why, then, do they have so many omnipotent
>guest stars?  Again, here's a restriction that they don't seem to
>follow.

They're probably trying to keep sci-fi-ish, as opposed to fairy-talish.
Hell, if eliminates episodes like "Cost of Living", I'm all for it.


>>_Stories that sound like TOS (Indian planet, Nazi planet)
>
>Considering how many TNG stories have been blatantly ripped off from
>TOS, this seems like another non-restriction.

Stupid principle (but good examples :-)


>>-Stories "high on the hoke scale" ("Troi kidnapped by space pirates, sold
>>into slavery." (Sort of sorry to hear they feel this way. If they don't get
>>her back, it could be one of my favorite shows!))
>
>This seems reasonable as well.  You've got to maintain SOME semblance
>of plausibility.

I'd rather they simply maintain plausibility (as opposed to a "semblance
of plausibility.")

Actually, I'd forgive them going over the edge once in a while if it
was because they were taking risks and trying to push the envelope. However,
the show has been by and large uninnovative and complacent -- especially
recently.


>>They want stories that take place entirely on Enterprise.
>
>Ho hum.  Frankly, this sounds like a lazy policy.  They've already
>paid for the sets, and the production crew doesn't want to depart from
>their beloved soundstage.  Cheap and easy.
>
>I'm sorry, but I for one am going to get darn tired of seeing the
>inside of the Enterprise week after week after week.  

It wouldn't matter to me if something interesting was going on inside
that ship. Unfortunately, such stories are few and far between.



. .                .                .        
: : . :. . :  :....: : .  ::.: .  ..: :    ..     : :    .:   :.:
::::::::::.: :::::::.:::::::::::.:::::: :?.:::::..::::.:.:: :.:::?
------------ -------------------------- -------------------.------
Kanamori's Episode Ratings: (last episode rated: "Time's Arrow")
  "This season began with a turkey. I'm simply trying to see 
   that it doesn't end that way." -- fictitious Paramount writer