Flashbacks in TV

I come down pretty hard on flashbacks, not the fun and sometimes scary flashbacks from doing too many psychedelics in college, the flashbacks we see in TV shows and movies. I don't feel they are necessary to tell a good story. Start the story at the beginning and finish at the end. When your story is finished, if the narrative allows, it's possible to move suspenseful moments forward to catch viewer's attention or foreshadow upcoming events.

I've already finished Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt season 2, it's funny, cute and easy to watch so it flows like water, and the first image is a flash forward cold open that goes into a flashback of three months earlier. This sets up the first story arc for the first seven episodes. This is an example of good flashback, it frames the series in such a way that creates mystery and intrigue. Much like the first episode of Breaking Bad and many of the episodes throughout the series.

The main trouble with new screen writers and flashbacks is that they start their story at one point, then when conversation comes up about a certain topic or event, they flashback to that event, then when it's over flash forward back to the present. What did that do for our story? What information did it give us about the characters? Maybe this works for a highlights show in season six to frame funny moments that happened in the past, Friends did this a lot, but should never happen in your pilot. For Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt it's the first episode of season 2, we have already been introduced to the characters and are familiar with the main plot. It also occurs in the cold open or teaser, which ever you prefer to call it. If you bring a flashback in Act 2, you have already failed. (Remember, this is my opinion and the opinion of some successful writers and producers I've heard on Podcasts such as Harmontown, Scriptnotes and The Nerdist Writers Panel.)

I recently watched Spy Game (2001) written by Michael Frost Beckner and David Arata, directed by Tony Scott and starring Robert Redford and Brad Pitt. A nice little CIA thriller that uses flashbacks in a very awesome way that breaks the Act 2 rule, yet this is a movie which has somewhat different rules than television. (Again, my opinion shared with professionals in the business. I am not in the business as of writing this.) The story starts at the beginning and weaved throughout the main plot is the story of two men who worked together, the master and his student, on covert missions and how eventually mistakes and ruthlessness broke the student and the master apart. But forged a friendship that in the student's time of need the master honored by helping in the only way he knows how, covert CIA operations. Watch it if you have time, it's good.

In television, you need to catch their attention. An exciting, mysterious teaser/cold open is what you want. In most crime shows, that's seeing the murder and then watching the rest of the show to see 'who done it.' In a drama, they show you a piece of the rising action then take you back to the start to show you how all the character arrived at that point. Comedy uses that technique also. You could Memento the whole thing by starting at the end then showing piece by piece getting all the way to the beginning which now is the end.

Some people get confused with how to use flashbacks because of Pulp Fiction. Tarantino made a film that does something similar to Memento. He has a story that has a beginning, middle and end, except he shows it out of order. They aren't flashbacks! The movie is just out of order, it's experimental, and at the time made lots of people very excited (myself included) and still does. No one else has, to my knowledge, attempted to make a movie like that except Tarantino himself with Kill Bill!.

Going back to Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, Tina Fey and Robert Carlock, did something that maybe you can only do when sending an series to air on a network like Netflix that gives you all 13 episodes on one day. It's possible that they didn't write it that way, I would actually bet money that they didn't. But, after or during filming they saw the opportunity to frame the story arc in that way. And, it only foreshadows the first half of the series, I said that at the beginning, but it bears repeating because that's the genius part. After the resolution of that story it begins a new story arc that takes us to the end of the season. Awesome.

Now to wait another year until season 3.

Goodnight.

Television Show Idea

With the success of Fuller House, the sequel to Full House that I haven't watched yet, on Netflix and the success of the television sitcom Friends, all ten seasons on the same streaming network and in syndication around the world. I once watched an episode in Japanese dub here in Japan. Not a big deal, kind of a waste of time. Anyway, my pitch to Netflix would be Friends Again.

Bringing the original cast back together to do ten 30 minute episodes of the friends lives in 2016. The last episode of Full House was in 1995 so twenty-one years after the original show audience's welcomed, with open arms, the come back of all the original characters in the same roles taking over where they are now in their lives.Why did this work? Because of the nostalgia sickness* that we all have.

So why would Friends Again work? Because of nostalgia sickness. The same reason why a new series of ALF would work on TV or especially on Netflix, Amazon Prime or Hulu would work.

"Yeah, but the last episode of Friends was in 2004, that would only be twelve years."
"Yes, the difference between twelve and twenty-one is pretty large. Yet, the difference in the culture has changed tremendously over that stretch of time. The iPhone and the internet, Obama, hipsters, podcasts, spree killings and gun control debates, legalized marijuana and gay marriage, diversity in media, twenty-four news! There's a lot to work with. In one episode somewhere in season three or four, Chandler gets a laptop and boasts about it five hundred mega byte hard drive. Five hundred mega bytes! Hard drives are now two hundred and fifty gigs and that's low. That's the difference."

As long as there are not a lot of hack and hammy jokes about the iPhone and being old and using technology and blah blah blah like we see in many shows right now then it will be all right. The show was written smartly in the past and will be written smartly again. I looked up smartly in the dictionary and yes, it is a word.

"What would the plot and story arc of the first season be in the show?"
"I haven't thought a lot about it, but it would revolve around the marriage of Joey. The show has a checkered past of revolving arcs around marriage so this would be familiar territory for the show and the fans. Joey is now a popular movie actor and is marrying a popular actress in New York. Depending on if Paul Rudd would like to return or not, we could have a second plot line around Phoebe's divorce with Mike and reconnecting with David, Hank Azaria's character. They will also have the children and parenting issues to deal with as well. Yet, the main theme would be the re-bonding of all the characters, hence the Again in the title."

I would be surprised if the cast of Friends haven't been approached with this idea or have even pitched the idea themselves. I stand by this idea and just because I publish this post it does not become my intellectual property, but if your Martha Kauffman or David Crane and you're reading this; Yes, I would will accept a staff writer or assistant producer position on this series. Thank you. And if not, I'll still watch Friends Again.

*Nostalgia Sickness is not a recognized disease in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), but should be considered in the future and definitely exists in our culture today and deserves to be profited from.

*The new series of ALF would evolve around the same culture advancements except Alf would be living with the grown up version of Brian Tanner and could revolve around his dating life. Sounds kind of like the plot to Ted.