okayI got a bonus when I got the DVD home: writer and director commentary track! Very insightful.
After looking through my notes and listening to the commentary, I came up with several general things to keep in mind as I write my spec.
In no particular order.
1. One of the directors said, "When I see a lot of direction [in the script], and not a lot of dialogue, I know it's a good script." He took it even further a moment later: "This show really works best when we've got no dialogue," referencing one of their typical science montages.
2. Know why you choose each character for each scene. Ie, is there a reason I should have Warrick working at the scene with Greg in act one, or should I just go ahead and send Grissom back there, since the emotional plot belongs to those two characters?
3. CSI is all about the details. Don't worry about having too much information in a scene or act, as long as it all fits in and we find out the results of everything (as long as all the scientific set-ups pay off). The payoff may only take a single line of dialogue.
4. Less is more, when it comes to character revelations. This is especially true of Grissom and Sara, less so of the rest of the team.
5. The initial introduction of the person eventually revealed as the real villain or perpetrator often happens during the second act of the episode.
6. Remember the "TMI-cam" and use it. :-)
7. Be sure to keep the audience up-to-date on what everything means. This is usually done through periodic reconstruct-the-crime discussion between our CSIs. "Butterflied" contains three major reconstruction scenes: the team's conference call in act two; Grissom and Cath talking it through at the scene in act three; and Grissom laying it all out for the perp at the end of act four. That doesn't even count multiple times that the CSIs make discoveries and theorize how what they've just learned affects their theory of the crime. That's almost constant, especially after act one, when most of the evidence-gathering happens.
Gotta write lots tonight.
