For no real reason whatsoever, here’s a pitch document that I sent to Time at the start of the month (Minus the pitch that was approved). This is the kind of format I work in for them, although it tends to evolve (I don’t always do pros and cons, for example).
– With Back to the Future being revived as a musical in London by the same producers as the Ghost revival/musical, a list suggesting other 1980s movies that are ready for musical revival (Short Circuit! Big! Cocoon!) with accompanying plot pitches and suggestions for song titles, show-stopping scenes/numbers, etc.
Pros: Fast piece, potential for nostalgic appeal.
Cons: Even if it ran on Tues (assuming approved today, written Mon), would that be too late for halo effect of announcement? Also, too niche?
– Op-ed about Sherlock’s season finale and fan-service in the new mainstream. For want of not spoiling the finale of the new Sherlock season (airing Sunday), there’s a lot of… pandering, perhaps, to those who have been paying very close attention to the season as a whole. This isn’t a new thing for Steven Moffat; his Doctor Who is built around the same model, with plots that require a lot of either close focus throughout or accepting that some things will have to be taken on trust in the finale. I’m stuck wondering whether this is the next generation of what could be called the Lost model of serialized TV: something that rewards obsessives, arguably alienates fans and builds brand loyalty through that very divide — creating a them and us mentality.
Pros: I don’t think people have really addressed this a lot, despite all the Sherlock attention?
Cons: Will people care about Sherlock post-end of S3?
– Related: Why aren’t people attacking Downton Abbey for being misogynistic this season? Are they, and I just haven’t seen it? The way the show writes its female characters is insane — Mary needs men to tell her to get past her grief, Anna gets raped and blames herself, etc. Consider this a stealth pitch, I guess.
[Approved Pitch Removed — but now you see how far down the list it was.]
– Tying in with LEGO movie (2/7), something about LEGO’s return to cultural currency? I feel like that’s happened through selling out, for want of a better way to put it — licensing outside properties and being adapted into video games and animation. LEGO isn’t really about, well, building blocks anymore — it’s a brand based on a visual aesthetic, the appeal of which is at least partially nostalgic. Is that sustainable?
Pros: Topical, something that I’m not sure is being talked about out there — again, unless I’m missing it — excuse to give overview of where LEGO is at right now as a brand/company
Cons: Too dry, perhaps? Do people care about LEGO as a company, especially when they could just watch Chris Pratt as a CGI blockhead?
