Meet Scott Williams

by Patricia Tallman

(Reprinted from The Networkers Newsletter from Casting Networks, Inc.)

Since the SAG contract with producers expires in June, actors have an enormous stake in the current WGA strike, which, as of this writing, is approaching its twelfth week. The DGA has agreed in principle to a new contract with the AMPTP, which has only now returned to informal discussions with the WGA. But speaking with many actors, I have come to the sad and frustrating conclusion that a surprising number of SAG members don’t really understand why we need to support the writers.

So this month, I spoke with Scott Williams, Co-Executive Producer of “Third Watch”, “Crossing Jordan”, “Without A Trace”, and currently, the FOX hit series “Bones”. A writer as well, Scott answered questions about the strike, while also discussing a producer’s relation to actors and how they can affect casting.

This interview preceded the media blackout imposed by WGA and AMPTP during this current round of informal talks. But even then, Scott made it very clear he does not speak for the WGA. While he is adamantly pro-union and completely supports its leadership and their position, these are his opinions, based upon his understanding of the issues.

Pat: Writers have had to go first in this ‘strike season’, which means whatever the writers are able to get or not get, SAG either is going to have to be happy with it, or head into a much harder fight.

Scott: That’s one way of putting it. Had SAG’s contract expired before ours, our roles would be reversed. Actors would be picketing, and we writers would be deeply invested in your negotiations. So yes, we drew the short straw and had to go first. Unfortunately, since the AMPTP walked away from the table, there have been no negotiations going on at all (as of Jan 12th). One has to question whether there has been any serious negotiation from the AMPTP from the start. Some writers feel like we’re being made an example of to scare the other two unions into submission. The DGA could have a deal any day now and hopefully it will be a fair one that will get us (WGA) back to the table.

The companies hire Nick Counter (of the AMPTP) to do what he’s always done, which is basically to say “No” to everything until we give up. Perhaps they gave him a number, as in “This is how much money we are willing to spend or willing to lose, and your job is to get as far below this number as possible, and this is the date we can hold out until.”

Now the date could be February or March, or the date could be September. We hope and pray it’s not September, since that would be just completely destructive to the whole entertainment community, not to mention businesses and the economy as a whole.

The bottom line issue at stake is New Media. There’s a gazillion dollars to be made in new media and the companies don’t want to share it. It’s so silly to even call it new media. It’s here and it’s already made a lot of money for people, but really the companies are just trying to hold us to zero or as close to zero as possible.

Pat: The companies have the added pressure that whatever they concede to the WGA, they will have to give to SAG and the DGA, do you think?

Scott: I don’t know if I’d call it pressure, but yes, our deal would serve as a model for other deals. Same as if the DGA should make their deal first, you can bet the AMPTP will do everything they can to sell us the same deal, sight unseen if possible. Historically, the AMPTP prefers dealing with the DGA because their demands are not the same as actors and writers. At this point, the feeling is that the companies will leapfrog us and make a deal with the DGA. The public implication will then be “The directors were so much more reasonable than those crazy writers”. Then they’ll come to us and say “Accept this”. It’s very easily the number they could have come to us with. They have never countered our proposal with a number other than zero. Per my understanding, back in June we asked for 4 more cents on a DVD and 2.5% more on New Media. Their counter-offer was basically “No residuals. And we know it’s only June but we’re taking off for the summer, so we’ll see you in September, goodbye.” Then when we came back to negotiate in the Fall, they “conceded” our residuals, which was no concession at all.

But the fact is they are trying to take away our residuals long-term, ours and the actors, by not paying us for New Media, which will soon take the place of network reruns, if it hasn’t already. Again, this is why actors should be so completely supportive of the writer’s strike. The companies want to pay us one time to write or act in the show or movie and then be able to show it online ad nausem for zero cents. That nice check you get when something reruns on network television will completely go away and not be replaced. That’s what we are all up in arms about.

Pat: Writers are not being paid for web downloads and neither are actors.

Scott: Full episodes are offered on many network websites under the guise of “promotion”. But there is advertising on these websites. That generates money that we don’t see a dime of. Same with downloads on iTunes. We’re paid nothing.

The AMPTP argue that we are already well paid, or paid enough, as though that’s something they have a right to decide. I will tell you that the living I make now was ten years in the making, but there were years of struggle to get here. I have many writer friends who because there are only a certain number of jobs and so many writers, do other things. They have other jobs like selling real-estate to make ends meet. When they finally get a job as a writer, they’ll get that one check for writing that one episode and they count on that residual check coming in the next time it airs.

People who don’t understand our position say things like “Well, if I make a chair, I don’t get paid every time someone sits in it.” Or there’s the infamous Lew Wasserman line “I don’t pay my plumber every time I flush the toilet.”

But we aren’t what you flush down the toilet, we are the water. Whenever an author sells a book they make money on it. When a band sells a CD they make money on it. Whenever I write a show and it airs I should make money on it.

Pat: Because they have sold it and made more money on it.

Scott: I think it was Bear Stearns or some Wall Street firm that said recently if the writers and actors get absolutely everything they are asking for in new media, the hit on the companies would be negligible. They are basically saying to the producers “You are going to be trillionaires anyway, so why not pay these people what they’re due?”

Pat: So why are they freezing this whole industry?

Scott: They’ll tell you it’s us freezing it, but you’ve got it right. And the answer is money, I suppose.

Pat: I have heard some actors say they would scab if there was a strike.

Scott: Well, that’s just crazy. Anyone who would say they would scab is naïve, ignorant, short sighted, sophomoric, take your pick. All of us want to work, but it’s so against your self-interest to scab, it’s so short term. It’s not that you’ll be blackballed by your union, it’s that you will be rewarding the companies who don’t want to pay you. “Oh go ahead abuse me, don’t pay me what I’m worth and I’ll act any way”, it’s so demeaning.

Pat: Change of subject. What does it mean that you are a Co Executive Producer?

Scott: The rank of writers on a television show goes like this: Staff writer, Story Editor, Executive Story Editor, Producer, Supervising Producer, Co Executive Producer, Show Runner/ Executive Producer. Not every Executive Producer is a Show Runner.
It’s usually just one, sometimes there are two.

But regardless of my level, I’m always a writer first, no matter what. And Co-EP, I am expected to supervise some aspect of the show to lighten the load of the showrunner. I’m the person they can delegate to. A lot of times, the showrunner need me to run the writer’s room”, to make sure that it’s coordinated and stories are always being generated and flowing and we are prepared to pitch and produce fresh and new ideas at all times.

But basically, or ideally, a Co-EP is either an unbelievably great writer whom the showrunner must have on staff, or he/she is a very good writer with other diverse strengths. Someone who can wear a lot of hats. They are responsible for the larger picture. Executive Story Editor, Producer, Supervising Producer, Co Executive Producer, by and large you get a vote in how things are run. As a Staff writer you are not given many other responsibilities. If we are splitting rooms, and a staff writer is just excellent at breaking story, I say “you go in there and break that story”. I am not that crazed about ranks, I don’t think anyone is. A lot more is expected out of a Co EP.

Pat: What does ‘running the writer’s room’ mean?

Scott: Because the TV monster needs to be fed, we are shooting a new script every 8 working days. It’s not quite an assembly line, but you need to put out a really great script every eight days or you’re screwed. And you want to be 3 or 4 episodes ahead of the curve as well. If we are shooting our Halloween episode in August to air in October, that thing has got to be written in and pretty well far along in early July. That means it needs to be in the story room by June. For shows like Bones, Crossing Jordan and Third Watch, the stories are two fold. You sit in the room and break the crime story your characters are going to be solving that episode, and you also go back and figure out what your characters are going to be doing interpersonally. You are going along the b and c story lines, the connective tissue for all your episodes. In order to do that you need a staff, you need to have more than one person in the room. There are the rare savants like David Kelly who don’t really have a lot of need for staff. They use their staffs as researchers to figure out how a court case might unfold. Mostly he churns out scripts and has people around him who make sure that everything else is done right.

A lot of show runners that I have worked for are responsible for the last pass on the script, also visit the set, talk to the actors, in the edit room, all that stuff. They are involved with pre-production, production and production.

Now that’s a long answer to your question! Oh yes, writer’s rooms. It’s a matter of keeping that room together, running and productive. Constantly breaking new stories, that every 8 days there is a new script ready to be shot.

If I am writing a script, I’ll be running it past the staff to get notes, the show runner to get notes and eventually then it will get to the network and studio to get notes. Our show runner Hart Hanson will either say “You know what, you address the notes” or “I have some things I want to do to the script too so I’ll address the notes.” Ultimately, your writing showrunner, like Hart, is the voice of the show. So Hart gets the last pass on every script. And he’s one of the best out there, both writing and producing.

There are some non writing showrunners out there, but most show runners I know are writers as well. They want that last pass at the script and that’s their right. I remember on Third Watch, a few years ago, a young writer said to Ed Bernero, who had rewritten her script, “Gee this script doesn’t sound anything like me now.” And Ed basically said ”Yeah I know. It sounds like a Third Watch.”

The job of the writing staff is to be there to mirror and mimic the tone of the show every time. You don’t try to make it your own. If you sign up to write a Grey’s Anatomy, you don’t write your very special Grey’s, you are trying to match the characters and sometimes is very subtle. My first TV job was working for David Milch on NYPD Blue. I thought I was nailing the characters tonally, but Milch said, ”You don’t quite have Sipowics’ spirit”. I disagreed at the time, naively, but now I know. Milch was Sipowics. How was I gonna match that?

Pat: Do actors ever weigh in on their own characters’ “spirit” or tone?

Scott: Sure, we all hear “My character wouldn’t say that” from time to time. The bad joke answer is to show them the script and the line and say “Sure he would, it says so right here.” That’s only for actors with a sense of humor. I remember Molly Price, the actress on Third Watch, was so great. I thought she was, without question, the best actress on television at that time. She could be demanding and challenging about the scripts. If she didn’t like something she had no hesitance about telling you. I’d talk to her about it, and maybe change a few things, and 9 out of 10 times she’d do it exactly like you wrote it the first time. It was just her process, which could be combative at times, but we never minded because ultimately, she made the material sing.

One time she visited from New York, where the show was shot. She wanted to sit in on the writer’s room and give us some imput. So we had her in, and she sat in the writer’s room. It was great, we loved having her there. But she only lasted until lunch. She basically said “Oh my God I don’t know how you guys do this everyday.” She couldn’t believe how we discussed the minutia of every single story line. We’d get really far down the road on a new story idea then decide, you know what, this just doesn’t work. We are going have to try something else. It’s frustrating at times. Not everything sings. Things sound great in the idea phase then you’d get further into it and it doesn’t fly. Molly said she learned a lot, and realizing how much thought and energy went into every word, she never complained about a script again.

Pat: If you know an actor and think they’d be good in a role on your show, how does the process work bringing them in?

Scott: I do it all the time.

Pat: There is a hierarchy involved that actors are aware of. What goes on from your side of the desk?

Scott: Most good casting people recognize that it doesn’t matter your level as a writer on the show, if you are a staff writer or whatever, if you are helping to produce your show, it’s good business to say yes of course I’ll bring this person in and let them read. That’s all you are asking them to do. I worked with one casting person who was strangely finicky about that. “Well, are you just doing them a favor?” Well no, I would say, I would only bring someone in who has a legitimate shot in getting the role.

Casting’s changed in the last ten years. Ten years ago, the showrunner could say “I want this actor in that role”. Now the studios are very influential in who gets cast. We’ll see 50 people for a role and 3 producers and the director in the room will say, “This person is great. This is who we want.” and the network will call the day before shooting and say “Nah, we didn’t like them.” So there are a lot of people who have to sign off on any casting decision. I have even seen it happen on small roles and I have been shocked. On a lot of big roles, they will have a favorite person that they will mention. Sometimes you’ll suggest someone and it will just fly. We saw someone for a role on Without A Trace. We were seeing a lot of people and just not finding the right person who nailed what we were looking for. The casting person suggested an actress. I knew her work very well and knew she could do the role in her sleep. But she wouldn’t come in and read. Nothing diva about it, she’d just been in to read a million times, and knew that we knew her work. Some actors can do this, but I don’t always recommend it. There may be producers on the show who don’t know you. They will say if I don’t see the work I can’t really make a judgment. I happened to know this one actress’ work and it worked out. She got the role. But when I spoke to her later, she had sweated her decision not to read. She’d never done that before. But she thought on this particular show, it worked out for her and she was great. I mention this in particular because she was pre approved by the network.

Pat: How does that work?

Scott: That could have something to do with her doing a pilot at the same studio. I have also heard the horror story from several years ago, when CBS was doing the show “The Education Of Max Bickford” with Richard Dreyfuss. Dreyfus had said” I can get you Peter O’Toole” and apparently some studio person said “Yeah, but what does he really get you?” That happens a lot.

But there are just as many great, credible casting people out there on top of their game. And I have been wrong many times! I have said I want this person and they say no, take this person and they were right. I’ve also gotten my way and regretted it. So, you know, casting is subjective. There just seems to be more hurdles to get the person you want.

Pat: Does it help if the actor is known to the casting person?

Scott: Definitely. Right now I am working with Rick Millikan, and he’s the best. He knows pretty much everyone, and if he doesn’t, he wants to meet them.

Pat: He’s very actor friendly and Christine & Helen are wonderful too.

Scott: They are. It starts at the top. He’s a generous good guy and his people are too.