19 October 2010
Posted in Writers - Ben Sokolowksi
"His brain has not only been washed, as they say... It has been dry cleaned." - Condon, Richard (The Manchurian Candidate.)
What: Four strangers, victims of a near fatal crash, manage their own rescue and proceed to go on with their lives, except…
Who: Arthur Immerman awakes to find that he is in an airport van dangling precariously on the rails of an overpass. Arthur is not alone, and others, Rick and Chasen, begin to rouse, stunned and frightened by their situation; Jennifer, in the back seat, is more seriously injured and has not yet awakened. As the van continues to teeter, the men are dangerously close to panicking until Arthur comes up with a plan that may (or possibly not) allow all of them, including the dangerously located Jenny, to escape the van before it catapults into the ravine below. Miraculously, his plan works and all 4 safely escape before the van breaks through the railing.
Arthur, Rick, Chasen and Jenny had arrived at the San Diego airport from very different locations for very different reasons – Arthur flew in from Hong Kong for his mother’s funeral; Chasen was on a romantic quest to find the local girl he had fallen in love with in Europe; Jenny was returning from an extended stay at a mental health facility; and Rick, well whatever it was, it is nefarious. Surviving the car crash is only the beginning of their troubles.
Somehow, making their own way to San Diego General, all wires have been crossed. When his insurance is denied and he is confronted with the information that his social security number is non-existent, Arthur, offended and angered, pays cash for his bill, as well as that of Rick. Leaving, he bumps into Chasen, an encounter he would have preferred to avoid.
Chasen: You ever get Déjà vu? I kinda feel like that with you. Like we’ve met before.
Arthur: I’d say maybe you’ve used me as your lawyer but… (looks him over) I don’t think you could afford me.
Chasen: No, that’s not the weird part. I feel that way with the others too.
Arthur distances himself from Chasen.
Chasen: You. The Rambo guy. Jennifer. It’s like… I know you but I can’t place it. (shakes his head) Never mind.
Arthur: (you are insane) Yeah. Weird. (hums Twilight Zone theme) Have a good one.
Single minded of purpose, Arthur continues on his path to the unpleasant reunion with his estranged father forced by the impending funeral of his mother.
We pick up Arthur standing at the door of a tiny house in the worst part of San Diego. Simply put, a trailer park makes this place look good. So if this is where Arthur came from… he rose a long way.
He knocks again – Finally, the door opens –
Arthur: Hi.
Reverse to Gerry (60s) standing in the doorway. He’s dressed in a cheap black suit, has massive bags under his eyes. This man is going through hell. In fact, he’s probably been through hell his whole life.
Gerry: What do you want?
Arthur: I can’t believe mom’s gone.
Arthur leans in to embrace him, but Gerry shuts the door halfway, cutting him off –
Gerry: Who are you?
A beat. Not the welcome home Arthur expected.
Arthur: Who am I? Dad, it’s me.
Gerry: Huh?
Arthur: Did you stop taking your meds again?
Gerry: What medication? You accusin’ me of something?
Arthur: Can I come in?
Gerry: I don’t know you.
Arthur: I’M YOUR SON!
Gerry: Kid, I’m burying my wife this afternoon. Leave me the hell alone.
Gerry tries to close the door – but Arthur jams his foot in.
Arthur: This some sick joke?
Gerry: I’m calling the cops now.
Arthur: WAIT! Hold it a second –
Arthur pulls out the picture from his wallet – of the woman and her child.
Arthur: Look at this. How did I get this? How?
Gerry: (looks at the picture) That’s a very good question. How did you get that?
Arthur: Because that’s me and that’s mom!
Gerry: You’re wrong.
Arthur: Wrong?? Dad, after the funeral I’m taking you to a neurologist – the best in the country –
Gerry: -- That’s my wife, God rest her soul, but that baby died six weeks after this picture was taken.
Gerry closes the door and –CLICK – locks it – leaving Arthur (and us) to wonder just what the fuck is going on…
Similar situations await the others, none more deadly than the scenario that plays out for Rick when he arrives at the La Jolla gallery, an art gallery that isn’t an art gallery, where he is employed.
Int. Schraeder Fine Art Gallery – Day
A granite sculpture of a woman in a fetal position fills the screen.
Mr. Nady (O.S.): It represents rebirth…
Reverse to Rick – turning to see Mr. Nady.
Mr. Nady: … coming to terms with a new life. A clean slate. (stares) A tabula rasa.
Rick: (annoyed) I know what it represents. (moving on) Mr. Nady, we’ve got a problem with Molly.
Mr. Nady: Have we?
Rick: She’s acting very strange.
Mr. Nady: Is she?
Rick: If she’s acting this odd around town… (leans in, almost comically) …she could jeopardize our entire operation.
Mr. Nady: Here’s the thing. Molly claims to have never seen you before. Correct? (beat) Neither have I.
Rick senses something’s off – he looks behind him – sees the two security guards reaching out –
He defensively elbows one in the neck – but the other puts him in a strong hold – Rick is stuck.
Well. Fuck.
Mr. Nady: Which has me wondering. Do you know what’s going on behind that door?
Before Rick has time to answer, his right temple has an unfortunate run in with a nasty left hook.
Cut to black:
Int. Somewhere – Soon
Complete darkness. Until –
THOOM – a spotlight turns on – shines its light down onto – Rick – he’s strapped to a chair, his mouth taped shut – his eyes squinting to shield him from the spotlight.
Similar sinister experiences await Chasen and Jennifer. Rick, lucky to escape with his life, will eventually be the linchpin to the discovery of what has and is happening to his fellow survivors.
No Meaner Place: From the thrilling moment that the rescue from the jaws of death is presented vibrantly and visually, the stage has been set for each character to bond, not only with each other, but with the audience who has immediately been made part of the ensuing stakes. Deliberately pulling the audience back and forth in time, disorienting us with a sketch of the past that clouds a confusing present, Sokolowski paints a very murky picture. Not quite science fiction fantasy, not quite conspiracy mystery, not quite action thriller, he has successfully melded them all. Straddling the ethereal mystery of Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go and Condon’s Manchurian Candidate as directed by Frankenheimer, something is rotten in Denmark; our four protagonists are going to be in for some really problematic adventures.
Sokolowski has found a way to employ the same kind of flashbacks that were used to such great and obfuscating effect on “Lost.” Who are these four characters? What is their fate? What is the master plan, and more importantly, can it be stopped? Prior to becoming a number in this “brave new world,” Arthur discovers an important piece to his own puzzle.
Close on Arthur’s airplane ticket stub.
Voice on the other end (O.S.); Thank you for calling American Airlines. How can I help you?
Pull back to a pay phone – we go up the cord, until we find Arthur speaking through it –
Arthur: Hi, I’ve got a question. (looks at ticket stub) I was on yesterday’s flight from Hong Kong to San Diego. Flight 429.
Voice on the other end (O.S.): Ok?
Arthur: Can you confirm I was sitting in seat 8J?
Voice on the other end (O.S.): I’m sorry?
Arthur: I know this is an odd request, but can you just tell me if I was sitting in 8J on last night’s Flight 429. The name’s Arthur Immerman.
Voice on the other end (O.S.): Sir. I’m sorry. I can’t do that.
Arthur: This is the most important thing in the world to me right now. And I’m just asking for your help. (genuinely) Please.
A beat. We hear the clicking of a keyboard through the phone.
Voice on the other end (O.S.): Sir, you said Hong Kong to San Diego?
Arthur: Yes.
Voice on the other end (O.S.): Direct?
Arthur: Yes.
A beat.
Voice on the other end (O.S.): Sir, we haven’t offered that flight in three years.
Life Lessons for Writers: “A journey is like marriage. The certain way to be wrong is to think you control it.” (John Steinbeck)
Conversation with the Writer:
Neely: I was sent this script almost out of the blue. I was trying to track down another writer and your manager thought that maybe I’d like to read your script. It blew me away! I was lucky to catch you because you’re in from out of town for meetings.
Ben: I’m actually in town to pitch another show.
Neely: Well, where did this particular page-turner come from?
Ben: I was flying home from USC, where I went to college, for my 5 year high school reunion and I fell asleep and had this extremely vivid dream. When I woke up, it still felt like part of the dream, sort of like “Inception.” The dream was that I landed in Toronto and my mom was supposed to pick me up, but she wasn’t there. So I took a cab home but then my mom didn’t recognize me. I still go to my high school reunion and again… nobody recognized me. Ultimately this script came from this dream I had about being forgotten. I had moved away from my home town; I’d come back and all of a sudden I don’t exist.
I think what really drove me to write this show was this feeling I had, this fear that I’m sure everyone has had a one time or another. What if I don’t exist? What if no one remembers me? What if I don’t matter? And from that, I just started writing and it turned into “Identities.”
Neely: So you went to USC for undergrad? In what department and when did you graduate?
Ben: I was in the writing division at the film school and got my BFA in ‘06.
Neely: To me, this script is so many different genres put into one blender. Did you see this as one particular genre or another; and if so, what is it or are they?
Ben: At the time I was interning for J.J. Abrams company and I really wanted to try to replicate a “Lost”-type series. That was a big inspiration for me because I think it has a lot of similar elements – it’s a lot of different shows wrapped up into one. For me, this was really looking at the characters and seeing where they took me. If one ended up being a bit more comedic, like Chasen, great. If one was a little more action-y like Rick, terrific, and so forth.
My hope was that people got it, because you can’t really condense it into a “cop” show or a “doctor” show – the single genre types that are so popular right now.
Neely: Well, that answers my next question which would have been what influences were at work here, because, as you noted, you’ve got the cop show, the fantasy, the sci-fi, the thriller. I definitely see the J.J. Abrams influence. What did you do when you interned at “Lost?”
Ben: I started interning for Bryan Burk, who, at the time, was doing a lot of the post production work and, well it’s hard to describe, but Bryan was the guy who seemed to do everything. When he promoted his assistant, I was brought in to be his new assistant during my senior year in college. I was pretty much working full time on his desk and going to school. But as a screenwriting student, you can find a way to do that. Then Bad Robot (J.J.’s company) formed a massive deal with Paramount and so I transitioned into development for the company and away from “Lost.” But when I started there, I got to go through the editing process and go to the scoring stages, the mixing stage, all of that stuff.
Neely: Who at Bad Robot saw this script?
Ben: I think my manager, A.B., probably gave it to either Athena (Wickham) or Kathy (Lingg); maybe both. They’re J.J.’s development people.
Neely: Why didn’t you hand it to them directly?
Ben: It was important to me for them to see me in a different light – not as an assistant, but as a writer.
Neely: Well let’s go back to “Identities.” We know at the end that Arthur and Jennifer have been “captured” and that Rick has made a perilous escape that puts him in contact with a mysterious ally. We also know that the rather clueless Chasen is dangerously close to being entrapped. What happens to him?
Ben: I probably should go into the macro-world of it all.
Neely: Please do, because if we never get to see this, I want to know.
Ben: You never know because you might actually get to see this.
In any case, essentially these guys aren’t the people they think they are. That we get. They all knew some part of this conspiracy – the conspiracy that there is an organization that wants to brain wash the entire public – get them to think that they’re not who they think they are as a way to control their minds. As part of their data testing process they took the four people who had stumbled upon this conspiracy to test their theories. So all these characters are completely different people who discover this conspiracy and are now part of the process. Except… Rick escapes and, obviously, the others will escape as well. They will have to find out who they were and what they knew in order to stop the conspiracy.
Neely: I loved Chasen’s “déjà vu all over again.”
Ben: Chasen is actually the son of the bad guy. He stumbled upon some files about all the people who have been brain washed. So that’s why he knows them, but he doesn’t know how he knows them.
Neely: As confusing as all of this is, you still managed to construct a “world” in which these characters will live. I talk about the “world” or the “home” a lot. You created the world, which you just described, which is the greater aspect of the story, but you also created a home where they all come together, the crash site, even if they never return there. It’s the establishment of their bonds, what they will always have in common and it’s the place where we experience who they are, or in this case who they think they are. From there, the rest of the story will unwrap. It’s a classic character drama because story comes out of character, character isn’t led by story. You’ve created backstory, a home and a world. The trifecta!
Ben: Thanks.
Neely: In talking to your manager, I was under the impression that this is still making the rounds; or at least I hope it still is. Can you talk about where you have taken it and where it stands?
Ben: I can’t go into too much detail but I’m hoping that we’re on track to land this as an international co-production. I’m Canadian, so there are lots of tax treaties that make it a little more enticing. I’m hoping that something will be coming up in the next few weeks.
Neely: There are several on the air already – “Sanctuary”, “Rookie Blue,” “Durham County,” “Flashpoint,” and “The Bridge.” As much as I understand about co-production (and that’s not a whole lot), I assume that this would be a co-production with an American studio along with a Canadian company because of the tax incentives. I know nothing about how Canadian TV works. I have, however, wondered why we were only selling and never buying. Sure, you make more money when you sell your product; but buying a Canadian series costs a lot less money than making it yourself and you’ve already had a trial with an audience whose only major distinction is their support of National Healthcare and saying “oat” instead of “out” (that is, if you live in Ontario).
So, what has been the reaction so far to “Identities” as a series, and especially as an international co-production?
Ben: Starting with the original script, it became my calling card. It opened up a lot of doors for me and people began calling my agents and my manager. We were getting a lot of incoming calls which was great and it actually got me a blind script deal at Warner Brothers. The international co-production possibility has only come up within the last few weeks. It came out of nowhere!
Neely: Besides the blind script deal, did “Identities” get you any work?
Ben: Yes, I staffed on a Canadian show called “The Listener.” I worked on season 2. Season 1 aired over a year ago.
Neely: What’s the premise?
Ben: It’s about a telepathic paramedic.
Neely: Oookay. Well it’s probably no more improbable than “The Ghost Whisperer” or “Dr. Vegas” with its “one deals the other heals”. This could be “I sense your pain.”
Ben: It did amazing in Canada and sold really well overseas. I came aboard in Season 2 when they decided to change the premise to the adventures of a telepathic spy, which, in its own way, makes more sense than a telepathic paramedic.
Neely: I agree. In its own way, “Chuck” is a about a telepathic spy (not so much telepathic as a strangely programmed-against-his-will spy) and depends only on massive (but enjoyable) suspension of belief. You know, this kind of thing falls under the category of “a gig is a gig.” If you’re good you learn from every experience because you don’t always get to choose. Early in his career, Jon Sherman, one of my very favorite writers (“The Compleat Pratt”) worked on “Sabrina the Teenage Witch.” It wasn’t Pulitzer Prize-winning material but he loved the experience and was mentored by Nell Scovell, the creator.
Ben: It was a great experience for me and I didn’t have to interview for the job. They read my script and hired me. That wrapped up in April and since then I’ve been working on the Warner Brothers script.
Neely: “Identities” is a great calling card, but I really hope it does become an international co-production. I hear so often from writers that their passion projects got them lots of jobs, opened lots of doors, that everyone loved their scripts, but no one produced them to series. So I hope that you’ll keep me in the loop on it.
Ben: I think “Identities” could really work as an international co-production. It could be set it up like “Persons Unknown,” a Fox International Mexican-American co-production written by Chris McQuarrie that did 13 episodes in year one.
Neely: I noticed that you have a freelance teleplay credit on a series from 2007-08 called “Fear Itself.” I pride myself on seeing one of every new series that airs and I can’t for the life of me place this anthology. How many episodes ran – when and where?
Ben: That was one of the first international co-productions. It was NBC and Lionsgate. It was a horror anthology with old time horror directors who produced these one hour mini-movies. It lasted for something like 8 episodes and I wrote a couple, but only got one on the air. It was a great learning experience, and my first paying gig.
Neely: That had to have been almost right out of school.
Ben: It was. It was about a year after, about the time that I left Bad Robot.
Neely: When reading the synopses of the episodes (source: Studio System), the otherworldly thriller aspect to them seem very similar in tone to what you’ve written with “Identities.” Coincidence?
Ben: Coincidence. Ultimately with almost any anthology show you’re sort of modeling yourself after “The Twilight Zone.” I grew up on “The Twilight Zone” so I have to admit that almost anything I write is going to have some nugget of a Rod Serlingesque story.
Neely: You’re credited with teleplay. Who wrote the story?
Ben: It was based on this short story by a British author named Paul Kane called “Dead Time.” I’ve since become “pen pals” with Paul, who lives in London. He’s sent me a lot of his work and I’ve sent him some of mine. It’s been great and I hope to work with him again.
Neely: Have you read other things by him?
Ben: Unh Huh. And he’s terrific.
Neely: You also have some below-the-line production credits on two J.J. Abrams shows. Did you get a chance to work directly with J.J.?
Ben: We had company meetings, and it was a small company, so there was direct contact. But I never worked with him directly, per se. I was really working with his partner Bryan Burk.
Neely: I know that you’re working out of town right now. Is it a green card issue or do you prefer working in Canada?
Ben: I love Canada. I grew up there, my girl friend lives there. I live in Toronto, so it’s not like I’m living in Winnipeg or Saskatchewan. It’s so easy to just hop on a plane to L.A. and I don’t mind commuting to wherever the work is. Being a Canadian writer, I find it a lot easier to get work.
Neely: Was writing something you always wanted to do?
Ben: Yes! I grew up wanting to write comic books. At some point in my teen years I fell in love with sports and decided I wanted to be a sports agent. Then I saw “Jerry McGuire” and I thought, “You know what? Forget being a sports agent, I want to go back to writing.” I actually had the pleasure of meeting Cameron Crowe once and I told him that. He laughed and said that I was the first person to see “Jerry McGuire” where it turned him off being a sports agent. Apparently everyone else who saw it wanted to be a sports agent.
Neely: (laughs) Going back to college, where else did you apply besides USC?
Ben: I applied to Syracuse, Boston and Michigan.
Neely: All of them for writing?
Ben: None of them had writing programs; all of them had film programs. So it was all for film; but USC was the only school with a writing degree.
Neely: What was your experience?
Ben: The education I got from the screenwriting program put me far ahead of any writers learning the trade, because I think writing is a craft. Having four years of dedicated study to that was great for my career. That being said, part of me wishes I had a broader education. I could have watched all those movies on my own; whereas I missed opportunities to take a lot of classes in Art History or Philosophy and become a more well-rounded individual. So I’ve been trying to catch up; doing a lot of reading on my own since then. It had its pros and cons, but the program itself was fantastic.
Neely: Any mentors along the way?
Ben: Yeah… I think Bryan Burk was definitely a mentor. I learned more from working for him for three years than I did in the four years at USC. When you’re in the business, when you’re in the show, having someone taking you places and teaching you things - that was really instrumental. And my manager A.B. Fischer has shepherded me from a wide-eyed young writer to what I hope is a more savvy one. I was also very fortunate that my stepmother was friends with a Canadian writer, who, when I was 15 and wanted to get into screenplay writing, took me under his wing and gave me the first script I ever read – an old copy of “The Fugitive.” I started reading scripts because of him; his name is Carl Knutson. I’ve also met some great writers in Canada in the last couple of years all of whom have really helped me. When I was at “The Listener” I was the youngest person by a decade so it’s been easy to find role models. I’ve been fortunate.
Neely: What about literary influences? Favorite authors or books?
Ben: Not surprisingly, I think Stephen King would be one. But I also love sprawling epics. I’ve loved John Steinbeck since I was really young. East of Eden is my favorite novel. I’m sure there’s a whole long list but I’d say that Stephen King and John Steinbeck are my two favorites, which is an odd combination I think.
Neely: It is an odd combination but if I were guessing, one I would think was for story and enjoyment and the other is for the pure reading pleasure of the craft and the language.
Ben: Absolutely.
Neely: Steinbeck is one of my personal favorites also. I wasn’t much of a reader in high school; I certainly read very little that wasn’t assigned. But after reading The Grapes of Wrath, one of the high points in 20th Century literature, I went on a (voluntary) Steinbeck jag, reading everything of his I could get my hands on. I even tried making the beer milkshake from Cannery Row. I suppose I really didn’t have to do that because the result wasn’t any different than described in the book – curdled milk and a disgusting smell. His writing is so deceptively dense and page-turning.
Ben: It’s easy to breeze through genius.
Neely: What are you watching on television now? What have been some of your favorites of the past?
Ben: Let’s see, it’s a new season… “Dexter.” I started watching “The Event,” although apparently not many other people are. I love “Friday Night Lights.” I’m mentally going through my TiVo list…
Neely: “Friday Night Lights,” by the way, is a real favorite among writers.
Ben: The writing is so terrific and I love “Parenthood,” too. So I’m a big Jason Katims fan. I don’t know him, but he’s terrific.
Neely: Jason also did “Boston Public.” He’s a really really nice guy. What else are you watching?
Ben: I’ve been so out of it for the last two weeks that I haven’t watched a single hour of television.
Neely: Well keep going through your interior TiVo list and we’ll come back to this. What about past TV shows? What TV shows do you think had an influence on you?
Ben: “The Twilight Zone,” without a doubt; “Quantum Leap,” “The X-Files”…
Neely: You’re more of a sci-fi guy than I had figured.
Ben: (laughs) Well the key is to hide the sci-fi.
Neely: Keep going… what else?
Ben: I loved “Ally McBeal.”
Neely: That was politically correct. What aspects of “Ally McBeal.”
Ben: No, really! I loved the sensibility. I loved that it was fantastical and grounded at the same time. It was sort of a rosy colored show.
Neely: It was actually designed to have a specific color palate, so I’m glad you picked up on that. It’s supposed to be somewhat transparent to the audience, but a really good show is almost always going to have a very specific palate that will guide you in a specific way.
So back to your TiVo. Are you thinking about shows you’re looking forward to watching or at least to sample?
Ben: What’s new that I haven’t started yet?
Neely: You haven’t covered any comedies.
Ben: I love “How I Met Your Mother,” especially the early years – seasons 1-3 – but I still watch it. “Modern Family,” but I guess liking it is a cliché.
Neely: It deserves its status. The writing is superb. You have a bunch of former “Frasier” writers who do not pander, patronize or condescend. They assume that their audience is intelligent.
Ben: That’s great; that’s what you have to do.
Neely: I also like “The Middle” which breaks no new ground and isn’t on anyone else’s favorite list, but it covers parenthood from the standpoint of average parents with average to below-average children, which is something you rarely see. Patricia Heaton is spot on as a frustrated Mom. “Modern Family” does cover some of the same parenting frustrations, but these are clearly upper middle class families.
Ben: Is that the joke of the show that they’re just average?
Neely: Not really. It’s still a family relationship comedy, more about the parents than the kids. It isn’t just that they are below average in income, jobs and academic achievement, they still love their kids and spouses and want the best for them even against the odds. Their struggles, both inside and outside the family, are not so different than anyone else’s – mortgaged to the hilt (even if it’s a dumpy house in the Indiana hinterland) with kids who rarely get it right and parents who often miss the point. Just ask my son, I almost always missed the point (and he’ll say that I still do). There’s something very releasing about watching that mom yell at her TV son and get no result whatsoever. I think the lessons that you learn as a parent don’t come until your kids are out of the house – they’re going to do what they’re going to do and yelling to the point of laryngitis isn’t going to make it go faster. I hate to think of the polyps I must have developed over time.
Like I said, there’s no new ground that’s broken; but it has a very solid heart and I look for that in any kind of writing.
Ben: The heart’s important.
Neely: That it is and it’s amazing how often it’s missing. When you’re being too cool for school, that’s what’s usually missing. I’m not a big fan of edge for the sake of edge.
Ben: I love “The Event,” but I’m missing a connection.
Neely: Ah yes, the multi-layered conspiracy show that has way too much going on and too many conspiracy threads. I’m actually not a conspiracy theory fan, so that makes it all the more amazing that I tuned into your script. To a certain extent, the conspiracy that is the core to your pilot is well disguised by the character development, because, once again, story is following character, not the other way around. “Rubicon,” a new show I started watching, is all about conspiracy but the writing is too precious. Just get on with it. If I have to see Will filing papers and looking meaningfully one more time, they’ll lose me. Actually they have lost me. Just get on with it!!! Involve me. With “The Event,” the conspiracy is quite intriguing but they’ve taken a kitchen sink approach and there is too much going on. When you take that approach, the viewer can’t keep track and it becomes harder to latch on to character and story. It’s too complicated. I’m not sure that having three central themes is very trackable.
Ben: Going back to “Lost,” there’s a moment in either the pilot or the second episode where Jack needs Kate to stitch him up. He tells her, “Count to 5 and then you won’t be afraid anymore.” And that’s when they connect and you connect with them. That may be what’s missing in “The Event.” You need to have that moment in the show where you “get” the characters and believe in them and fall in love with them. Without that, a great plot is just a great plot but not a particularly great show. I think that’s the difference between a “B” movie and good television.
Neely: Unfortunately a lot of these things that we’re talking about are not necessarily the fault of the writer. Remember the process is that you write it and then someone else messes with it – usually someone at the network or studio who is giving notes. I guess we never know what the true intent was. I read the script of “The Event” and although I thought there was too much going on, it was very elegantly written.
Ben: It was terrific. I loved that script; it was my favorite pilot.
Neely: Another example of really good writing and excellent critical response was “Lone Star” that ended up being a flop with the audience. I think it was trying to be a classic soap opera like “Dallas,” so character isn’t entirely fleshed out (which is a factor in the genre) because soap opera is all about story, just not in a procedural way but in a serial way.
Ben: I thought it was a terrific pilot; I loved it. I thought is was so ballsy – even in their music choices. But it’s the kind of show that has a “collision point,” like “Lost.” From the pilot of “Lost,” you know that at some point they have to get off the island and you’re waiting for that to happen. I think the writers on “Lost” were brilliant in being able to extend that by having the flash forwards. But ultimately, from the pilot on, you’re dangling a carrot. The show can’t survive as soon as the audience reaches that carrot. In “Lone Star” they set themselves an impossible task because how long can the two wives go without knowing about each other? Even with brilliant writing, how far can you extend that premise? Can you get a season out of it…two? If you’re a network, you don’t want one season, you don’t want two seasons; you want five seasons.
Neely: Your analysis of the collision point is excellent. I had never thought of it that way before. In “Lonestar” there are probably too many things for the audience to track, but more importantly, the reveal comes too early. The collision point, the reveal is already there. Once you know the reveal, you’ve only got two choices. It goes this way or that; and if the audience doesn’t find either of the two choices engaging enough they’re not going to stay. In retrospect, one of the choices might have been more enticing if we didn’t already know what the main character’s motivations were. Certainly, one of the things that worked well was that the lead character, the bigamist con man, was something of a cipher – we didn’t have a feel for him and we shouldn’t have a feel for him yet. It would have been more interesting if he had room to become that guy you didn’t think he was. But in the end, I don’t know. It was a very well written and well produced pilot. As an audience member, though, too many subplots were initially introduced and I already knew he was going to get caught. So, is the hook “I want to see how he gets caught?” That’s the hook in the movie version that ends after 2-2 ½ hours. But in a series, do I want to wait 100 episodes to see if and how he gets caught? Probably not.
Ben: That’s what’s so interesting about “Dexter.” That’s not the hook. In 9 out of 10 serial killer shows, that would be the hook – how’s he going to get caught. But in “Dexter” they entice the audience by making him such an interesting and conflicted character. You’re rooting for him not to get caught because you are completely drawn into his guilt and conflicted nature. Avoiding getting caught is only the C story. It’s more about him having to overcome that dark stranger. There isn’t a traditional hook there, or if there is one, it’s sort of buried. It’s now going on 5 years.
Neely: The collision point has seemingly already occurred, and it doesn’t matter. The collision point by your definition occurred in the first season. It’s an aspect, his getting caught, but it’s an aspect that’s repeatable. You’ve made a really good insight.
So, What else are you working on right now?
Ben: I have this pitch right now; and I hope to do a high concept show with no collision point. So we’ll see.
Neely: I have my fingers crossed that “Identities” gets more than just praise – that it gets the shot it deserves. I’ll be watching for the rise of the very talented Ben Sokolowski! Thanks for taking the time. And please keep me posted on what’s happening with you.
