BRIAN GRIFFIN DEAD: GENIUS OR DICKERY

BRIAN GRIFFIN DEAD: GENIUS OR DICKERY

The news has already probably broken where ever you are; Brian Griffin, the anthromorphic, alcholic, aspiring novelist dog from the Family Guy show has been killed off, and replaced with Vinny, a tough, no B.S. taking canine.

While fans are calling for blood, I'll list briefly why, from a writing point of view, this is either genius or dickery (i.e. an act of completely dick-headed-ness).

Genius:

Fitting tone, style, and humor; Family Guy was been known for its random and absurd actions, namely random flashbacks, gruesome chicken/man fights, period jokes (both historical and ovulation), and deaths (Diana Simmers, Murt Goldmine's wife, Joe Swanson's son (sort of), and KIND OF Cleaveland Brown in a way). Even Peter died and came back to life (TWICE!).

In fact, Brian's death has been hinted at for many years; he's 35-50 in dog years, I can count at least two occasions where his own dog mortality has been the butt of a dark  joke, and even he's hit and killed a dog mirroring his own future death.

Why would you truly think, in a show as random and bizzare as Family Guy, that ANYONE would be safe.

Plus, in a world of long running TV shows, where "killing off character" is usually code for a side character leaving, it's kind of refreshing that one show went for the gusto.

Even the introduction of a replacement seemed like a stab at the idea.

Dickery:

This changes the entire dynamic of the show. It's short-sighted simply to quote Brian as being simply Stewie's equal when he was also Peter's best friend, a (not so) secret admirer of Lois, a comforter to Meg, and even Quagmire's pet-peeve (pun not intended). Admittedly, Brian had slipped away from the voice of reason character he was in the beginning, but he was still something of a father figure to Peter.

It is of course ironic that the most human character should be an animal in a world where they are easily disposed of and tossed aside. It's almost cruel and slightly sadistic that a semi-pro-animal rights show would just cull a dog. Their reasoning, according to reports, is that killing off a human, especially in the family, would have too much of an impact and been too close to home. Though the backlash on twitter, with the hash tag #bringbrianback, says otherwise.

But...

I can't be the only one who's skeptical of this. I can't be the only one who thinks there's a bigger joke to all this. It wasn't so long ago the infamous "You're getting old" episode had us think they were closing down shop when really it was a big joke about hype and normality. I think one of a few things may happen;

1. Brian is brought back; According to report the staff writers loved "an idea" and planned several next episodes around it. Notice the report never said "THE idea" or even specifying it directly as being the idea of Brian's death. I think the idea may be of simply killing off a character, bringing in a new one, making them unlikable as possible, and then killing them off and returning everything to normal.
2. Some possible solutions to Brian's death may be;

• Vinny slowly morphs into Brian, to no one's notice.
• God brings Brian back to life.
• Brian isn't dead.
• Stewie finds a way to bringing Brian back (maybe with a Brian ray gun or something)
• Death himself brings Brian back.
• Or (possibly most likely in my opinion) They just act as if nothing happen, Brian back in place.

Worth a thought. Only the 8th of December, Family Guy's next air time, will tell.

BRIEF NOTE PART 2

BRIEF NOTE PART 2

I forget to mention I have two more sitcom pilots under consideration for Amazon Studios.

TITLE: TRACY

BRIEF: An eager, ambition, and outspoken young woman has one advantage over most women when it comes to living in a man’s world… she’s was a man. Tracy takes on a world of double standards and patriarchy with her sense of feminism, outspoken views, and awe inspiring humanity.

GENRE: Sitcom, LGBT, female protagonist, feminism.

IT'S LIKE: "Ugly Betty" meets "Queer as folk".

TITLE: TESTED

BRIEF: What happens when your one night stands become your to-do list?

When Ryan finds out he has herpes, he has to contact every partner he’s had in the last year… all 582 of them! With the help of his persistent sister, Ryan owes these women more than just an apology.

GENRE: Sitcom, dating, episodic.

IT'S LIKE: "My name is Earl" meets "Sex and the city".

Please check them out. The links are the pictures themselves.

DRIFTERS REVIEW: HONEST SHOW, DEVOID OF STEREOTYPE.

DRIFTERS REVIEW:

HONEST SHOW, DEVOID OF STEREOTYPE.

On behalf of all men, I'd like to thank Jessica Knappett, Drifter's writer and star, for finally proving that the whole "women get mad at you for cheating on them in their dreams" thing is actually true, as written and performed by a supporter female role.

"Drifters", E4's newest sitcom, could be taken as something of an Inbetweeners buffer show, but than you'd be taking it all wrong. Nearly entirely autobiographical, Drifters is about a trio of friends (the typical protagonist, fiesty side kick, and dopey friend) who are in that horrible state of post-uni, pre-reality; hence the name. The great thing about the show is it hasn't taken itself too serious in the first few episodes, which it could have, given that the show glances at severe youth unemployment, internship culture, and sexism. Indeed the show actually depicts one character giving her boyfriend a blow while he plays video games. Side note; this works equally well with films.

Definitely not a show that was enough attention in terms press or "coming soon" advertisements, especially compared to the equally new "London Irish", or even the already stable "Fresh Meat".

An honest show that doesn't feel the need to overly appeal to men, though it does so successfully (at least to me). Not so much a Female Inbetweeners as it is a British "Girls" with Jessica about to become a UK response to Lena Dunham.

Rating: 8/10. No one will be blamed if the show got a little more preachy on youth unemployment.

Available on 4OD, Drifters airs Thursday at 9:30 pm, on E4.

HOW TO KEEP GOING.

HOW TO KEEP GOING.

About exactly 45 days ago I submitted Ace Off to Amazon Studios as part of their open policy submission process mention in a previous blog. The reply from Amazon Studios was;

"Thank you again for creating your project, ACE OFF, at Amazon Studios. The option and evaluation period is now over, and we have chosen not to exercise or extend our option on your project."

Under no circumstance do I say this should put people off submitting to the program. Because this is simply one reply to this particular projects (which through my own admission is an acquired taste), while there are three other projects waiting for a response (Eric & Seymor, Tracy, and Tested). Eric and Seymor's option deadline is the 14th of November (this coming Thursday), so finger crossed.

I'm writing this practically fresh from the little nip in my stomach at ANOTHER rejection. Ten years straight is the case when it comes to this journey of mine. And yet the pain was quick an in a flash. Which got me thinking about how and why a writer continues on with his work, and deals with rejection, frustration, and apathy to the craft and art of his/her writing and his search for opportunities. So here's a brief list of tips and tricks for aspiring writers on how to keep going, and things that may help.

1. It's happened to the best.

• An interesting movement that has happened of late has been a de-glorification and pro-humanization of successful people. Writers are not exempt from this. Many modern writers are victim to the same cruel rejection letters as their aspiring comrades. 
• Emily Dickinson was practically unsuccessful during her life; a female Van Gogh of sorts.
• Dr. Seuss received 27 rejection letters for his first book (not counting others before his name was recognized).
• Stephen King's first novel Carrie, now in cinemas a second time as an adapted movie, received 30 rejections. Amazingly, his wife is the sole reason he's respected writer now, as she convinced him to resubmit one last time, as he was just about to throw Carrie in the trash.
• J.k. Rowling is probably the most famous and most extreme example, as she was practically penniless, borderline homeless, divorced, and a single mother on welfare. There's a disgusting rumor that she wrote an idea for the Harry Potter book on a nappy (diaper for American readers). Whether true or not, J.K. is still the perfect example of what it means to be a writer with nothing to loose.
• "The Rum Diaries" was written by Hunter S. Thompson at 16... it was not published until he was 61... I feel like a little whiny bitch, don't you?
  

2. Small victories.

• It helps to critically and honestly list any and all achievements you have done so far, no matter how small they are. Being critical is as much praising yourself as it is criticizing yourself.
• For example. I'm 24 now. Since I was 14 (which was when I decided I wanted to be a writer), I've;
• Written poems and short stories for a few magazines and newspapers.
• Written some very well received Teen Titans fan fiction.
• Won the "Jim Craven" 2007 award for poetry.
• Written a few short films for college.
• Been published as part of an anthology in "No Bother" in March of this year.
• Receiving praise and education in writing from Setev Downes, Stephen Walsh, Ferdia Mac Anna, Donal Beecher, and Brenda Woods.
• Self Published on Amazon.

3. Keep at it.

• The proof is in the pudding, so to speak. Very few successful writings don't have thick skins or blow off criticism. Think of this as your writer boot camp. If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball. If you can write under rejection, worries, and shit, you can write.
• It's not a no, it's a not yet.
• Breaking Bad was pitched to HBO, Showtime, TNT, and FX; all rejected it. AMC were the only group that picked it up.
• When you think about it, it's a numbers game. If someone tells you the exact number of years, months, or day it would take you to become a author or writer, you would look forward to that day. When you think about it, the only difference between reality and that hypothetical situation is knowledge of that date. Murphy's Law applies greatly to someone who constantly writes and submits. Whatever can happen, will happen, eventually. If you love something, truly love it, it shouldn't matter if it takes 10, 20, or 80 years, you would do it until you make it.

4. Strategies.

• You may not have gotten rejected because of something you did, but take this time and chance to reflect, re-draft, re-write, or maybe even polish your delivery.
• Many cult heroes are those who build their own fan base  which takes over years, and are great for calling to action. Many Youtubers  internet celebrities, comedians, and film makers now make a decent living appealing to their niches. Chances are, you keep at it, gaining friends and fans alike, you be able to self-publish to them directly.
• When I was in my teens, I made an ultimatum; either I become published at 23 or I just put everything online. The irony is I did both, unknowingly.
• My point is, Online and Self-publishing are no real and cheap alternatives to getting rejections. Publishers aren't driven solely by quality anymore. As Gandhi once (did not) say "Be the change you want to see in the world". Perhaps you need to do that. If you truly do believe in an idea, maybe you should put your name on the line then.
• Check out KDP for a free ebook publishing service on Amazon.
• Study and research publishers more thoroughly.
• I personally find it insulting when publishers say "check out our catalog to note the books we cover", which I've always found as a ploy to either discourage persuadable writers from submitting, or as a cheeky way to get you to buy their products. But their might actually be something to this.
• Some publishers have imprints and subsidiaries hidden in the website, usually at the bottom or in contact. Instead of submitting to regular publishers, their more genre specific outlets may possibly be the ticket.
• On average, many publishers work in units of months and years. So far example; A book may be submitted in January, replied to in March or April, accepted by July, finalized by October (proof read, focus group reviewed, re-edited, etc), and finally be released either in time for Christmas sales or January New Year Sales.
• With this in mind, maybe try to time submissions in time for events. So maybe submit romance novels in the summer or spring, so it'll have time to possibly be published for Valentine's Day. If you're story is event specific, try to think in terms of that.

I hope this helps. If nothing else, perhaps I'll be back he Friday with some good new on Eric and Seymor.