Directors vs. Writers -- emergency, help!

A

Aceism

Member
A very good opportunity opened up for me last week, so I jumped on it -- and basically now we have a meeting at Paramount studios with one of the executive producers from a hit TV show. They are going to set time aside in their day to watch our comedy TV pilot.

Here's the thing. We have several versions of our pilot. The writer wants to show a version that is five minutes faster than the one I want to show -- however, I felt like the faster version lost a lot of the comedy. I have already shown this to three different producers, and they have all independently verified that my version is the funnier one. They are not friends of mine, they are producers in the business who have not heard of me until recently when I showed them the pilot. They say the faster one seems to be cut in such a way to conserve speed at the cost of jokes.

I raised 50% of the money through an investor (my other EP raised the other half), directed the pilot, as well as forged the connection with Paramount. So I feel I should pull rank and override the writer's decision. At the same time though, I know in the professional world of television, writer is king, and this writer spent about a year writing this thing. So it might damage our working relationship if I do this.

But I know in my heart that the faster version is not the better one. I feel that way, and so do several people who are producers. I think the reason the writer wants the faster one is that a couple of weeks ago we took it to our manager and he said he was "too long." About 30%. So we chopped a large portion of it. Since then, the writer has been obsessed with cutting his material to the point where we start to lose the comedic beats and jokes that make this a comedy. I feel strongly that showing a speedier version of the pilot will hurt both my career and my writer's.

I understand that busy execs don't have all day to watch things, but I don't think five minutes is that much of a difference, especially when those five minutes are your best material.

In the editing room, I let the writer have freedom to edit with the editor just because he is the closest one to the material, but I know the material just as much as he does after studying it day and night and working with the actors. And I damn well know for sure that the version he cut before the final cut is better and a lot funnier.

What do you guys think? Should I pull rank? Obviously I'm in a tight spot here, but someone will have to compromise, and I think it will have to be the writer. I am not by any means a power director, but this will hurt my career and my writer's if I don't go ahead with this. The writer has written really good stuff but he's not showing it.
 
Last edited:
You need to have a sincere heart to heart with your writer and sort this out. Be open to listen to his points and see if theres a compromise. Is there time for a new compromise cut? If not at the end of the day someone's going to make a tough decision that could have a deep effect on the relationship going forward.

Good luck with it all - sounds like a great opportunity. Hope you guys can sort through it.
 
Aceism said:
I know in the professional world of television, writer is king, and this writer spent about a year writing this thing.
Click to expand...

As I understand writers are just above caterers.

You definitely have rank here but you really don't want to hurt your working relationship with the writer so you have to use some Jedi mind powers to get him on your side.

Shouldn't your pilot hit a specific time anyways? As I see it their shouldn't be too much of an argument.
 
Hey guy--

Since it wasn't mentioned: tv shows usually have rigid time requirements and must conform to that length, period. How does your show time out given that reality? The producers at Paramount will know instinctively if your show is the wrong length and doesn't conform to what they need.

Given that -- there's the possibility of a 3rd version that pleases everyone (or no one).
 
tmnt said:
As I understand writers are just above caterers.
Click to expand...

Most of the producers listed first on a given TV show are the writers, and the showrunner who calls the shots is the head writer. Writers run TV shows. Once they get to a certain level on the staff, they do most of what a director would do on a film, too.
 
I don't think it matters as to whether or not the show is exact in its length. You need to put your best foot forward in whatever version you feel does that best.

Don't burn the bridge with the writer though. It's just a pilot, so tell him he can either have his way, or had a better shot at making it (politely of course).
 
To the questions regarding length, yes, while it is true that shows have a rigid length (22 min for half hour, 44 for hour, approx), most studios and networks, when purchasing pilots from independent filmmakers most of the time will re-shoot the pilot with their crew and cast to conform within the total running time requirement. They buy the concept, not the actual pilot. I could be wrong about this, but a top hollywood manager that packaged Entourage told me this exact statement. He is on board to represent us well, and he said, "you could show me 10 minutes or 40 minutes, but if it isn't good then count me out."

Basically, as a concept, you need to put the best version of whatever you shot on the table without of course going overboard and screening 2 hours of crap. Hence my conundrum: my cut is 34 minutes in length, and his is 30 minutes. We are permitted to show either, but we must pick one.

And writers, especially head writers / showrunners call the shots in television. They hire and fire rotating directors. They are usually billed as "executive producers" and writers as "producers" on television shows. They are very powerful, and may elect to direct episodes if need be. In film, it's a very different story. Writers are at the mercy of the director and of course, the studio.
 
Last edited:
Agree to mediation, compromise or discuss until one of you gives in. Don't pull rank. The writing is the most important thing you're showing the producers, and you don't want to lose a partner over something so trivial.
 
Update, guys, in case you were wondering:

I had a long discussion with the writer, and we ended up compromising on a cut that had half of what his vision was, and half of what was mine. We took it to Paramount today, and they liked it with of course a few criticisms. They took the next 4 episodes and are going to contact their junior TV/lit agents at CAA to look at our project and try to work for us.

Thanks for the input. Even as a director, compromise can sometimes be your most valuable asset. As much as I wanted it my way, I never let my ego get a hold of me. And me and my writer haven't damaged our relationship at all. In fact, if this thing does sell we'll probably work together again in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top