Being ONE perspective on the Hollywood TV writing processes - might (or might not) be interesting to know what it's like for someone who isn't sitting on a sweet studio development deal. Interesting and amusing none the less.Rod Hilton
Because I read both books around the same time and they have quite a bit in common, I'm going to compare and contrast this book with Tina Fey's Bossypants.Both books deal with the lives of writers producing television shows, so it's easy to compare them.Fey's book is lighthearted, self-deprecating, and extremely funny. Gurvitz's book, on the other hand, is angry, bitter, and completely unfunny.Now, I'm not saying it's unfunny BECAUSE it's angry and bitter. I love angry bitterness as much as the next guy, I love Lewis Black, Louis C.K., and many other dark comics. Ian Gurvitz's book isn't unfunny because it's mean, it simply happens to be both.Considering that the book is written by a comedy writer, as well as the fact that Gurvitz is clearly trying to be funny, it says a lot that this book induced nary a single laugh from me. Fey's book, on the other hand, had me laughing out loud while reading it in public on numerous occasions.The reason this is so interesting to me is that Fey's book is largely about success - she was the head writer on a few seasons of Saturday Night Live, and went on to be the head writer of 30 Rock, an excellent comedy show. She's one of the most successful female television writers today, and her story is one of triumph.Gurvitz's book, however, is largely about rejection and failure. Constantly his work is being rejected - in fact a sizable portion of the book is devoted to him trying to get some pilot scripts sold, only to be told over and over that his shows are too dark and bitter. He concludes from this that television producers are stupid assholes, but I can't help but wonder if maybe they were telling him to lighten the scripts up in a desperate attempt to eek some comedy from him. 30 Rock is one of the funniest shows on TV. Gurwitz is responsible for obnoxious multi-camera sitcoms such as Wings, Becker, and the abominable "The Exes" (the creation of which provides much of the book's content). 30 Rock's jokes are clever, while Wings, Becker, and The Exes all aim for broad audiences with run-of-the-mill humor. It's interesting to read two perspectives on Hollywood TV. Fey is genuinely funny and talks a lot about those to whom she owes her success, while Gurvitz is a humorless prick who blames everyone else for his failures.Every chapter opens with Gurvitz talking about the news at the time of writing, which almost always centers on George Bush or the Michael Jackson trial. The jokes he makes in these openers are the sorts of things that aren't even fit for Jay Leno's monologues. The humor is so predictable and embarrassing, it's amazing that Gurvitz actually has good taste in humor, talking about other TV shows that he finds genuinely funny.One of my favorite parts of the book is how Gurvitz talks about how there aren't that many original TV show ideas, but it's all about execution. He's right, Friends was just "young people in the city" which had the same basic plot as dozens of other TV shows, but Friends was a huge success because of how well it was executed. Later in the book he discusses some of his ideas for TV shows that he's trying to sell to various networks, including a show about prostitutes. None of the networks go for it, but towards the end of the book he talks about how a network just picked up a show about a group of call-girls, noting with a tinge of bitterness that it was almost the exact same idea he pitched the very same network earlier. Most people, especially those who had realized the "execution is everything" point he made earlier, would take this as valuable criticism of their writing ability, but instead Gurwitz refuses to realize this, and blames the network for being dumb.The book is very interesting, with lots of insider information about how TV shows are written and produced. Extracting these facts can be informative and entertaining, but it's a shame that it's surrounded by Gurvitz's relentless bitterness. I'm sure he wants the reader to feel like Hollywood just turns people bitter, but I came away from the book feeling like Gurvitz just kind of sucks as a writer and blames the world for it. The painful humor of his book and the TV shows he's so proud of writing solidify this view for me.If you're willing to wade through Gurvitz's self-pity and misdirected anger, the book is a mildly interesting read, though I don't recommend the audiobook, as it's read by the author and even he is clearly bored to death with his own words, reciting his prose with a detached monotone.Knute
Becker and Wings are obviously not Seinfeld and Mash, but Gurvitz's time and experience in the business offers up a lot that any aspiring TV writer, or someone just interested in the inner function/dysfunction of network TV would find interesting. Rather than sugarcoat things or lure you in with the "here's how you make it in the business" approach, he lays his angst out on the table like the bleeding, wounded animal it is.His voice is a little Harvey Pekar-esque, and he walks through the 2003-2004 era (but still relevant, I think) with world/entertainment news inserted for context. I have to wonder if his pet peeves (execs trying to make his dark stories/characters more happy and likable) is unique to him, or at least amplified by his sardonic point of view, but that's for the individual reader to decide.I did read Bossypants and a number of other industry books plus, like I said, I know some folks in the business, and I find it intriguing. If you do too, you should read this.Adam
Gurvitz seems to think that his version of the "Hollywood is a hell hole full of liars and thieves and whores" whine is funnier and more interesting than everyone else's. It's not. The book itself is also surprisingly poorly produced -- for some reason, Gurvitz chooses to illustrate some of his points using unedited printouts of various websites, of all things, some of which actually have important text cut off by the margins! Shockingly amateurish. There's also quite a bit of filler, including "humorous" commentary on national news events that are apropos of nothing, as though Gurvitz's editor told him he needed an extra hundred pages to fill out the book. That said, Gurvitz is a veteran television writer who's spent years down in the trenches -- if you're interested in the torturous, wrenching process of pitching, writing, and producing narrative television comedies, he adequately explains how the process works.John Ghekiere
I listened to this as an audio book, part of research for a novel I'm writing. Didn't give me a LOT to go on there but was still informative about the writing gig in television. If you do the audio book as read by the author, beware, his timing is poor and his tone is flat.Brett Bydairk
This is, more or less, a journal covering two and a half years in the professional life of a TV writer, pitching stories, meetings with know-nothings at the networks to "discuss" problems and rewrites, waiting to hear decisions, and more. There is also a good lot of explaining why some of these things happen, and a lot of side-opinions on people and situations, without naming too many names. Juicy and delicious, he half-apologizes for the way he writes, "this shit just slips out."Recommended for anyone interested in behind-the-scenes TV writing.Auriette
I thought I had an idea of why most television is crap, and I was pretty much right. In "'Hello,' Lied the Agent" Ian Gurvitz takes the reader through the trying process to get a half-hour comedy show picked up by a network. Even before his steady gig on staff for "Becker" wraps up, Gurvitz is pitching ideas to studios and networks. On those occasions when he gets a nibble and is asked to produce the script for a pilot, nothing ever seems to be good enough. Rather, I should say that nothing is ever simple-minded enough for the execs. We see them pass on good ideas, see them really exited about projects they later reject, and see them proceed with surprisingly similar ideas a year later. Through it all, Gurvitz maintains a mostly positive and very appreciative attitude towards his work. In addition to Gurvitz's notes (this is a journal of his experiences over about 18 months), he includes clippings from trade publications and entertainment websites. They range from articles about the shows that get a greenlight for production to calendars of the then-current television season.I found it odd that, in the beginning, Gurvitz used a lot of footnotes to define industry terminology, but later in the book, he worked the definitions into the text (a much preferred method). I knew what 99% of the terms meant, but because Gurvitz would sometimes embellish on the actual definition with a comic jab or personal insight, I still felt I had to stop and read them all.My only criticisms are first, the rampant use of profanity. I use it myself, but I'm more uncomfortable reading and writing curse words than I am saying them, and I don't feel their use added any insight into his feelings most of the time. Secondly, I think the publisher could have made the trade articles a little larger on the page, so they'd be easier to read. Better yet, they could have re-typed some of the articles (or gotten the files from the editors). Then again, perhaps those editors told them what they could use and how large they were allowed to make them. All in all, this is a book that any aspiring TV writer should read, if for no other reason than to be prepared for the uphill battle both to sell the idea, then to complete a script that's acceptable to the many personalities that will have a yay-or-nay in the process.Thomas Herring
Not too bad except for a lot profanity. I think he could have gotten his point across without using it. As for the inside workings of Hollywood for television, it brought out a lot of how they choose shows for the upcoming season. He answered a lot of my questions on why it seems to be dumbing down a lot. There is a disconnect between the writers and the head bosses who think business and not creative. Anyway, it was a fast read. I blew past a lot of the magazine clippings because there was so much to read and the type was too small. The writer complained and worried a lot. Don't know why he still stays with it but I guess its in the blood.