Tim Kirng Interview

[TheArsenal]

Mods: could you correct the title typo please. Many thanks.

My question really is: Why didn't all those people who were contacted by "Linderman" notice his disappearance? They didn't know they were being tricked by Maury...

I listened to a half hour interview with Tim Kring on an NPR show called "The Treatment".

The writing process for this show is even more slapdash than we suspected. The only reason Linderman was brought into play again was Malcolm McDowell became available for a short time. So they shoe horned him in. Many of the story decisions are based on actor availability and fan reaction. And Kring seems to be very aware of fan reaction - he reads the boards.

But, the most interesting part to me was his admitting he's not writing the story he wants to see. He is - he says outright - far less interested in the characters once they have established powers. Their situation, Kring explains, is different and nowhere near as compelling. It becomes less about character and more about how the powers and their use play into the plot. The onset of powers and the problems they bring, is what he enjoys writing. But writing for a network hit show, he says, has other considerations and is a series of compromises.

Oh, and he admits no character who is dead needs to stay dead and that, because it is sci-fi, there is no situation that must be permanent no matter how it looks on the screen.

 

[the Dagman]

Kring may be good at coming up with initial concepts, but his ability to write characters for the long-term and ability to follow through is frankly appalling. Well written characters virtually write themselves if you have a team of writers that actually understands the characters. He can still be involved in the creative process by providing the grand plot points for the chapter, but he should allow his writers to flesh out that plot and determine which character should do what based off the characters' histories and motivations. The characters need to appear to be using their heads and their actions need to make sense in context of their character. Or else you lose credibility with your viewers. Kring can't pull that off apparently.

Maybe this show needs to do what Smallville did this season to get a fresh perspective. Fire the show runners and bring in people who actually get the premise of the show.

 

[blockaderunner]

Kring may be good at coming up with initial concepts, but his ability to write characters for the long-term and ability to follow through is frankly appalling.

Well the problem was, by Kring's own admission, is that the characters he created weren't made for the long run. The show was originally about taking several archetypes (The Blue Collar Beat Cop, The Ambitious Politician, the Office Drone, The Struggling Single Mom, etc.) and giving them amazing abilities, letting the drama play out through the season, and starting the whole thing all over again the following season with a new set of archetypes. Problem is that the season 1 bunch were so popular with the audience and network that Kring had no plan B for them and what made them so endearing in season 1 is now irritating in season 3.

So, in true American fashion, he had no follow through.

 

[davejames]

Frankly I don't think his idea of "resetting" the characters every season would have worked any better. Hell, the novelty of watching new characters discover their superpowers was already wearing off in the second season.

 

[blockaderunner]

^^^^Alright. Well how about this. Take a handful of characters who worked (HRG) or had the potential of working in the long run (Mohinder) and carry them over into the next season. I think the idea of new supers cropping each up was a sound one. It would have kept the show fresh and interesting. It would have been more of a concept driven series much like The Twilight Zone. Besides, Kring even seems bored by it.

 

[JoeZhang]

Oh, and he admits no character who is dead needs to stay dead and that, because it is sci-fi, there is no situation that must be permanent no matter how it looks on the screen.

Then you kill any dramatic potential for the characters and might as well go the whole hog and have them put on the pervert suits and fight crime from rooftops.

 

[RoJoHen]

The problem with the "new characters every season" idea is that Season 1 did not give any real amount of closure to the characters he had. Yes, they stopped Kirby Plaza from blowing up, but the characters themselves still had stories to tell. However, instead of truly continuing with their natural stories, he forced all the characters into goofy situations based not on who they were and what they would do, but rather on what kind of weird plot he can crank out.

 

[JoeZhang]

The problem with the "new characters every season" idea is that Season 1 did not give any real amount of closure to the characters he had. Yes, they stopped Kirby Plaza from blowing up, but the characters themselves still had stories to tell. However, instead of truly continuing with their natural stories, he forced all the characters into goofy situations based not on who they were and what they would do, but rather on what kind of weird plot he can crank out.

Well it's the old thing about plot driven vs character driven - the best writers can mix the two up and everyone is happy - here we have "characters" who seem to be off their meds because their actions are entirely dictated by the plot not by how their character would act given the previous development of the character.

 

[JonathonWally]

But writing for a network hit show, he says, has other considerations and is a series of compromises.

Can you even call the show a "hit" anymore? it's shit.

 

[RoJoHen]

But writing for a network hit show, he says, has other considerations and is a series of compromises.

Can you even call the show a "hit" anymore? it's shit.

The commercials sure try to make you think it's still a hit.

 

[Mallet]

It's the 21st most watched show according to a report I read on Monday, so that's not to bad... The list stops at 100 and it would have probably come in a 19 or 20 except for the football games that were on. If you cut out all sports and news programs (like 60 minutes) it would probably be in 15th place. Not great, but still not to bad, especially with the America wide love affair with cops shows and medical dramas. I think the only genre show beating it is Fringe (which is kind of a cop show mixed with sci-fi so it has an unfair advantage). of course Lost and 24 arn't airing right now and they are sure to beat it in the listings when they return.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

But writing for a network hit show, he says, has other considerations and is a series of compromises.

Can you even call the show a "hit" anymore? it's shit.

The ratings are stable and the demos are good. It's NBC's second-strongest scripted show.

Frankly the ratings are better than the terrible writing deserves. That means there's a loyal audience for Heroes, probably people attached to the characters or the actors. All we need is for the hacks on the writing staff to get the boot and be replaced by people who know what they're doing because even the most loyal audience is only going to tolerate so much. The writers are really pushing their luck, it's like they want to lose their jobs (I guess a couple already did, haw) and get everyone else fired along with them.

In direct contrast to Heroes' situation, I've noticed that Prison Break has a premise that has run out of steam (as it was bound to; Heroes has a premise that could run indefinitely but Prison Break really should have been a two-year show) and the writing is often very strong in characterization. They're also good at writing intricate plot arcs that are twisty as hell but hang together logically.

But the audience has grown bored of the premise so the ratings suck despite the surprisingly decent writing for such a tired premise. There's Heroes' next writing staff (along with Bryan Fuller and whoever he wants to bring with him from Pushing Daisies, another well-crafted show with dead-on characterization).

The problem with the "new characters every season" idea is that Season 1 did not give any real amount of closure to the characters he had.

The real problem with it is that what audience this show has left is watching because they like this or that character or actor. They sure aren't watching for the writing!

Well the problem was, by Kring's own admission, is that the characters he created weren't made for the long run.

Maybe he didn't intend it, but strangely that's what he got. There's nothing wrong with starting with an archetype and then drawing a specific, believable character out of the archetype. I think in many cases the strong actors cast in the roles drew out the real person inside the archetype on their own initiative. The writers just need to follow the actors' leads, except they seem to lack the talent or imagination to do so. Maybe the actors should start doing the writing, too. They couldn't be any worse at it.

Take a handful of characters who worked (HRG) or had the potential of working in the long run (Mohinder) and carry them over into the next season.

I can go for that. The characters who have serious potential for growth (counting only main characters) are Nathan, Peter, Sylar, Mohinder, Noah, and Matt. Maybe Claire. Lose Tracey/Nikki and Hiro, there's no place interesting to go with either of them.

I think the idea of new supers cropping each up was a sound one. It would have kept the show fresh and interesting.

If they're Adam and Elle and not Maya and Alejandro, sure. More attention in the casting department is maybe what's needed there. They have been casting way too many duds in major roles.

 

[rafterman1701]

And all of these comments show why Kring is nowhere in the league of Abrams or Whedon or Ron Moore. He simply got lucky by bringing the X-Men premise to TV.

 

[Warp Coil]

Bryan Fuller... paging Bryan Fuller... Please report to Tim Kring's office. Smack him, push him aside, and get to work ASAP.

 

[Siwilliams]

And all of these comments show why Kring is nowhere in the league of Abrams or Whedon or Ron Moore. He simply got lucky by bringing the X-Men premise to TV.

There was also Mutant X

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

I gave up on the show this season and I can see why from these interviews and comments. Its just so gimmicky and things just change direction and become inconsistent for no reason. There's no real story being told, it's all very.... comic book, which is maybe the point. But it's everything that's BAD about comic books.

I'm actually surprised I used to debate which was better, Heroes or Lost. Now shows like Lost and Battlestar (which isnt even a bastion of pre-planning and plotting to begin with) just feel like a step "higher" than Heroes.

 

[TheArsenal]

Opinion Alert: Heroes was never better than Lost. Not for a second. Lost devotes a great deal of time and energy creating full characters by using both the present and their past. So when the plot does frustratingly meander along as it will do, or the writers dole out bread crumbs of the bigger picture which don't even necessarily make sense, it's easier to live with because there is tangible character growth. It's a character first series.

Heroes has people running around the screen emoting heavily and importantly like they're actualized characters, but they're nothing of the kind. They're plot pawns.

What is interesting is Kring notes that shows like Lost, BSG and 24 "taught" the networks how to watch open ended character driven shows with long arcs. He was able to get his show on the air because it came in the wake of those others. Turns out Heroes is a much different animal.

The only reason I'm still on board is Heroes' premise is strong enough to keep me waiting for it to get better. And it can. But will it?

 

[blockaderunner]

Lose Tracey/Nikki and Hiro, there's no place interesting to go with either of them.

While I agree that Stripper Hulk was a waste, Hiro could have embodied that Joseph Campbell theme of the Hero's Journey. A theme that goes back to King David to King Arthur to Frodo to Luke Skywalker. And Future Hiro in Season 1 showed that he was eventually going to get to that point of being a true hero and warrior. But his character has been stagnant since Season 2 and, what's worse, now he has the personality of a 10 year old, which is no different from Season 1 Hiro except there's no bad English accent.

 

[Mallet]

Lose Tracey/Nikki and Hiro, there's no place interesting to go with either of them.

While I agree that Stripper Hulk was a waste, Hiro could have embodied that Joseph Campbell theme of the Hero's Journey. A theme that goes back to King David to King Arthur to Frodo to Luke Skywalker. And Future Hiro in Season 1 showed that he was eventually going to get to that point of being a true hero and warrior. But his character has been stagnant since Season 2 and, what's worse, now he has the personality of a 10 year old, which is no different from Season 1 Hiro except there's no bad English accent.

The problem is you can't ever have Hiro becoming a true hero or warrior because once he did, he would be unstoppable. He is already too powerful, while being a looser. If he got over that... Well time travel is just to powerful an ability for a character to have and control in a series.

At least Star trek had the temporal police to reign in Star Fleet from using it all the time. Heroes doesn't have that.

They either have to keep Hiro stupid and a looser, or take away his time travel abilities.

 

[Mr Light]

They should never have put time travel into the show. The precog paintings are bad enough. Hiro is powerful enough as a teleporter, but throw in time travel too?! Or at the very least he could freeze time momentarily but not travel backwards and forwards.