Blog Archives

IR Print Interview: Michael Rauch (Showrunner) For “Instinct” [CBS – CBS TCA Winter Press Tour]

Having spent many years exploring the nooks, crevices and beauty of The Hamptons on “Royal Pains”, showrunner Michael Rauch heads towards the city and network with his follow up series “Instinct” on CBS starring Alan Cumming. After completely a panel for his new series with his actors at the CBS TCA Winter Press Day, Rauch spoke with The Inside Reel about tone, the building process and the allure of New York City.

Can you talk about the perspective of “Instinct” as a series?

Michael Rauch: [It is all things] combined, both nature and nurture, [and for the lead character] it formed a very specific type of way of looking at the world. What we talk about in the pilot is abnormal behaviors and, for him, he felt abnormal as a child and gradually as he got older realized that who gets to define what’s normal and what’s abnormal? That maybe being abnormal is actually normal and that’s not a stigma. That’s a big part of his way of looking at the world and, hopefully, for people who watch the show, the same thing which is that just because society defines you in a certain way doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with you. It’s much less than, say, Benedict Cumberbatch in Sherlock where you really feel like that guy could be on meds — we don’t go into it that much although, I’d love to have the success of that show.

You described “Instinct” as a little show, but you’re a procedural on CBS.

MR: I’ll tell you, from my own personal viewpoint, the shows I’ve done have always been underdogs. They’ve always been smaller shows. So, we are on CBS. I know the beauty, the power, and the pressure of that. At the same time, we’re a mid-season show, we’re not called S.W.A.T. or S.E.A.L. team. As much as people love Alan, I don’t think he has the recognition that say a David Borealis –- who is amazing –- does, or Shemar Moore. These are guys who bring a giant audience. We’re also a little show because we have a gay male lead which I think is very non-mainstream. So I think that there are a lot of things, not against the show, but [some that] don’t necessarily make it easy to promote. It’s a light, hopefully, funny procedural. But that’s the type of thing that on CBS there isn’t a lot of. I think that in terms of the shows that are easy to kind of put forward [are done] just by a title — again, like a S.W.A.T. We don’t have that. We don’t have people driving hummers and mowing down people. So all the things that feel traditionally like CBS procedural meat and potatoes, this has a lot of more peculiar things going for it. That’s part of why we’re mid-season, and more of a character show. I think always the odds are against a show like that.

What was CBS’ reaction to having a show with a male gay lead?

MR: Incredibly supportive. I think it’s a big reason why they bought the pitch. My whole thing from the beginning, and I talked about it with Alan before we both signed on was, even though this is a gay male lead, the show is not about that. That’s number five or six about what makes this guy who he is. And this isn’t a show about gay marriage. It’s not a show about being a gay detective. We really don’t deal with the obstacles much in season one. If we’re lucky enough to have longevity, we’ll get into it and we want to be authentic to it, but it’s more just a piece, an element of the show as opposed to this is what the show is about.

Can you discuss themes of ambition too because with “Royal Pains”, the doctor there wanted to balance the lives that he had as well. Could you talk about that and the aspect of ambition within Alan’s character, but how that’s sort of reflective of “Royal Pains”?

MR: Absolutely. I think ambition is such an interesting thing because we all have our own independent ambition, we have a societal ambition and sometimes they get out of whack. So one of the conflicts for Alan’s character, for Dillon, is that he went into the CIA to please his father. Little did he know that he had his father’s genius for being an operative. It was a surprise to him and a surprise to his father, and it is the thing that drives him. At the same time, Dillon met his husband, fell in love, and his partner basically said, “If you want to live that life, I can’t be with you. Because I don’t want to be with someone who I’m going to wonder, “Are they coming home or not every day.” And so, Dillon said, “Great. I’ll quit.” And then little did he know that he misses that ambition. He needs that. He needs to fight evil. He needs to make the world a better place. So he’s in the situation where the thing he needs most is in direct conflict with the person he needs most. So it’s an ambition to be a successful partner in a relationship versus an ambition to what drives him and satisfying that. Yeah.

Could you talk about the tonal aspect? With “Royal Pains”, you guys were able to do a little bit of slapstick and then it got real dark.

MR: I love “Royal Pains” and when we first started that show, we started as a much darker show. It was very important to me and to us for it to be a show that made you feel better. I think that was a big part of its success. And I think that there’s so much great television out there that is dark, and anti-hero, and apocalyptic. I feel like there’s not a lot of TV out there that you can go along for a ride – either watch with your kids or just feel good about the world when you dine. “Royal Pains” was something that we really tried to do that with. Even though we had dark stories sometimes, we tried to balance it with humor and with character, with a humanity, and characters that you cared about. And it’s very similar in this which is we have darkness, hopefully not too much darkness. We have snakes. We obviously have murders. I’ve never done that before. I’ve never killed anyone before on a show…it’s really weird.

Even on “Royal Pains”?

MR: People died, but no one was murdered on “Royal Pains”, but people died. It’s a lot of pressure and responsibility to do that kind of show. There’s a scene in the pilot which I think they showed in one of the promos where Alan and Boyan is standing over a dead body. A guy had been stabbed 52 times and you see all the stab wounds, but they haven’t bagged her yet. To me that scene works and yet it was a challenge. I felt a lot of pressure, we felt a lot of pressure making it because these two people are in front of each other – over a corpse. So, if it doesn’t work then the show doesn’t work, but I think the scene worked. I think that scene, in a way, is a microcosm of what we’re trying to in the show which is balance, crime, and stakes with being able to have fun at the same time.

Did you have to workshop Dillon as a character in order to get it right? 

MR: Marc Webb directed the pilot and he’s a terrific director. And Marc and I, and Alan and Bojana had a six-hour rehearsal one day in Marc’s apartment. And that just got everything to click.

What about your table read?

MR: For the network, for the network president, everyone there – everyone is nervous and terrified. No one is moving back and forth. No one is creating any dialogue together. And all of a sudden everyone is saying the words out loud.

Was there a turnkey moment in the pilot? Or during the reading?

MR: I wanted to basically jump out a window after that table read because it was horrible. Because I hadn’t worked with any of the actors. They’re nervous, everyone is doing it in their accents. Alan is playing an American. Bojana is playing an American. They all have accents. The only one with an accent too hard to use is Naveen. So, it was just like Frankenstein’s monster and horrendous. Then we had a cast dinner afterward and I was thinking about how quickly my career would end after we shot the pilot. Then we started rehearsals. Once we were able to really talk about the characters together, Alan ran upon their rhythm.

The locations you guys had in The Hamptons when you shot “Royal Pains” were just amazing. But in New York City, you have to have those individual, very identifiable things. Can you talk about New York City as a character, and how that integrates into the elements of story?

MR: That’s a really good question, because we actually hired the same location person – his name’s Mike Fucci – who did Royal Pains. He has done the pilot and the series so far, the first season, for “Instinct”. He understands, as he did in “Royal Pains”, that, even though things look very similar, from episode to episode, they also have to be different. I was born in Manhattan. I’ve grown up in New York my whole life. We’ve shot on every borough, and we will continue to, so that we don’t just see the Sex and the City New York. We see the Bronx. We’ve shot in the Bronx a couple of times. We see Brooklyn, or stages of Brooklyn. We’ve shot in Queens, Staten Island.

Is there any locations that you can talk about that you really enjoyed on this one?

MR: My favorite location, we just did the finale there. We were in Long Island City on the East River, facing the Manhattan skyline, on the other side of Roosevelt Island. And just being able to have the background — I mean, my favorite building in Manhattan is the Chrysler Building. So, having the Chrysler Building, and the UN, and the Empire State Building as a backdrop…you can’t replicate that anywhere in the world. It’s the most iconic thing. But, honestly, being anywhere in New York, you feel the texture and the energy of the city. And, although our tone is slightly elevated –- we’re not going to show graffiti, we’re not going to show some of the filth that’s there –- but, at the same time, we really want to let New York be a character in the show.

By Tim Wassberg

IR Exclusive Print Interview: Ian Gomez For “Living Biblically” [CBS – CBS TCA Winter Press Tour 2018]

Comedy can be a fickle beast and knowing how to play the beats plus moving in rhythm with your fellow actors is essential. Whether attacking single camera on “Cougar Town” and “Felicity” or multi-cam with “The Drew Carey Show”, Ian Gomez has an inherent intention for getting it right. After conducting a panel with his fellow actors at the CBS TCA Press Day for the new series: “Living Biblically”, he spoke exclusively with The Inside Reel about process, texture of character and the sometimes trickiness of tone.

Being on the set of ”Cougar Town”, I still remember there was so much energy. Could you talk about sort of the approach with this kind of material? Because it’s very tonal.

Ian Gomez: It’s a fine line that the writers had to walk because ultimately, it has to be a funny show, and it’s about religion. So they didn’t want to make fun of religion, nor did they want to be preachy. So it’s how do you do that, make it funny, make it watchable, and make the characters likable? That’s a really hard thing to do as opposed to on Cougar town, where they’ll be drinking and jokes about dating and kids and stuff like that. So the task here is much harder.

As Father Gene, you’re sort of the interpreter of rules in this one. That’s what sort of defines how you play on set.

IG: Right. Yeah. So my role on the show is kind of the voice of reason. But yet I have to be funny and yet not be too preachy. The biggest hurdle I found was having to put out all of these religious beliefs and be funny and have a backbone and be a real person. So not just a talking Bible…this is right, that’s wrong. And it’s not written that way. [It is how] to find a place where the character can live, where he’s a real person…a very religious person, with a strong faith but also with a great sense of humor. And not dark, but he can be sarcastic, like a regular person. He’s in a bar. Most of the scenes I’m in takes place in a bar so…

That sounds like Drew Carey’s show a little.

IG: Yes, it is. (laughing)

Is this the first time you’ve done a multi-cam show since Drew?

IG: No. I was on “The Norm Show”, with Norm MacDonald.

Can you talk how the format has sort of translated? Because now everything’s like, everybody wants these little bits.

IG: Right. There’s no room for building anything. It seems like a lot of sitcoms are set-up, punch, set-up, punch, set-up, punch. On this show, there’s a lot of jokes but not a lot of exposition where you’re setting up the joke or setting up the backstory. It seems more of an old-school kind of sitcom where the characters grow. You get to learn the characters, then the humor comes from character humor. Based on how, if this person says it, it’s funny. If another character says it, it wouldn’t be funny because these characters are different. It seems like, on a lot of sitcoms, it’s like, “Here are a bunch of jokes, and you pick them.” Just like, everybody gets five, and it doesn’t matter which ones.

How much research did you want to have in the back of your mind for this? I mean, obviously, you’ve had experiences with different religions over the course of your life and career.

IG: Yeah. I didn’t trail a priest or anything like that. I felt that I knew enough about what people thought of priests and rabbis and religion, and the fear that maybe keeps some people away from them. Some people would not just go up to a religious leader and have a conversation for fear of being judged or something like that. I wanted to be a relateable priest. I wanted to be someone that people would say like, “Oh, I wish my priest was like that.” I wanted to be someone who you could sit down and talk to. And there was a difference there. There are some scenes that would take place in church and some scenes that take place in the bar for me. In the confessional scenes, it’s more priestly. But in the bar — so there’s a separation between those two times. Not that he loses his sense of humor in the confessional.

Is there a difference in truth in the two space or how he looks at truth?

IG: No, no, no. But when you’re in the house of God, there’s a certain amount of respect in how you hold and behave yourself within that, but within those boundaries, still be yourself and be a human, and you’re there for other people to help them. I also found that it was being able to help the lead character Chip, who’s going through this thing in the pilot. My character thinks this is the craziest thing he’s ever heard.

The God Squad aspect?

IG: No. Just the trying to live by the Bible, the way it’s written, literally. It’s insane and also dangerous. [So my character] tries to convince them to just use it as a guideline. Like one line in the show is that “BIBLE” stands for Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth. So it’s like be a good person, golden rule kind of stuff, love God, love your neighbors, and anything like that, but you don’t have to go [like] stone adulterers and do all those other stuff. So being practical yet religious in the modern day.

There’s a very specific look to Father Gene. Could you talk about physicality informing the character?

IG: Well, I wanted the kind of — you see the old movies where the priest is a little old bald man, with glasses, spectacles, and kind of a thing? I was thinking of that. So the little old Irish priest. I kind of wanted to have that look. If I had hair, it would be the long-haired, hippie priest. I wanted to be the priest you might recognize. And I’m from New York.

So you probably saw a lot of this kind of guys growing up?

IG: Yeah. But I was terrified of priests as a child. My mom’s Jewish. My father was a Fundamentalist. His mom is a Fundamentalist. He wasn’t, but I always considered, whenever I saw someone in a religious wear, I was almost afraid of them. There was this I didn’t know how to handle, how to approach, how to talk to somebody like that, and what do I say and how respectful and all those other stuff. So I wanted to play a more approachable person.

And my last question to you is, with comedy, it’s easier on single camera. Can you talk about technique versus instinct and how that works? Not to give away your process, but about the balance between those two, especially in comedy.

IG: Right. Well, working on a multi-cam, you rehearse all week, not in front of an audience, and then you get the audience there. And they laugh in different places, and that kind of throws you off. And the wonderful thing about this is that you know it is TV, so you can do multiple takes, as opposed to the theater that says, “Oh, that, okay,” and then you just have to go with the flow.

But you guys always did multiple takes on Cougar Town. Do you find that made it better, or did it take away the spontaniety?

IG: But you don’t know how it’s going. You don’t know. Although you’re doing different takes and everything, you don’t know what the reactions are going to be. With multi-cam, you kind of get it right away like, “Oh, that worked there. That didn’t work.” And then you get into the rhythm of it more. Working on single cam, you’re kind of working in the vacuum. You really don’t know. And then it’s up to the editor to put all that stuff together, the different takes and cameras and camera angles and the sizes. So it’s more reactive right now with the actors to see what they’re doing.

By Tim Wassberg

Network Equation & Special Challenges: The TCA CBS/CW/Showtime Summer 2013 Press Tour – Feature

Equating the ideas of major networks as well as their cable spinoffs and genre casings poses special challenges as creating edgy fare comes with its own contrivances about how to make things but economically and creatively viable. CBS though seems up to the task.

arsenio-cbs-tca-2013

The Arsenio Hall Show”, which brings back the once stalwart cool man of late night who abruptly fell off the scene, comes with an interesting delight: how to make this older man who epitomized the 90s into the fold two decades later. He told us two years ago at a cable function in a small group that he was planning this. What is interesting is that he is doing it with the same people as before and by extension the same company with a couple extras. Arsenio himself notes the change in times with the technology saying “Debbie Gibson [back in the day] sent me a FAX that she wanted to sing on my show. That was my text”. Another example he gives is “I remember Barbara Streisand calling me with a Bill Clinton question. Now she can tweet”. Sounding a little too much in the play, he speaks that “with a joke, you are able to Google now”. One of the things that he thinks gave him the confidence to return to this specific fray was his win on “Celebrity Apprentice” because “I have been Number Two at anything I have ever done” so “it was nice to win”. The aspect that also promoted it was the enticement of his son. He relates that he left the late night show he had at the top of his game but it was to spend more time raising his son. He explains “I needed balance in my life” and “the compliment from me to Paramount was that they don’t want you on the air if you know you’re going” which was the reason for the show’s abrupt end. Now that his son is older, when the finale of “Apprentice” came along, his son told him “we could win it!” This showed to him that his son had some investment in what he was doing. Arsenio was known in breaking music acts back in the day but the actuality is that “the stats point that music doesn’t get as good numbers as the talk”. He points that someone who has been supportive is Jay Leno, whom he says many people think as combative but he explains that this is true only when they are in direct competition with him. Jay, Arsenio explains, just wants to win, making the comparison that “Ali & Frazier didn’t get along initially”. His end game is that “at the end of the day, I am a stand up comic and I am there to get laughs” but “I just need to be funny in the way that I do it”.

good-wife-cbs-tca-2013

The Good Wife”, continuing its much ballyhooed run on CBS, recently received a watercooler boost with the campaigning of the infamous Anthony Weiner back into the New York mayoral race. Robert King, who exec produces the show with his wife Michelle, says that “there is a certain demand in telling the story” but “sometimes the audience is [only] inches ahead of us [and] sometimes yards ahead of us”. In comparison to the real life reflections with the recent Weiner situation, he says “we are the happiest people since we have so much to write about” saying “the Weiner thing hit it right on the head” though “Julianna [Maguiles] creates a good temperature on set”.

mom-cbs-tca-2013

Mom”, a new series starring ever blonde Anna Faris and Alison Janney, seems like an interesting mix especially with its addiction background of the story thrown in the comedy mix. After having her baby with husband Chris Pratt (from “Parks & Recreation”), Faris says “I wasn’t ready to get back to work” but he read it and pushed her to do it. Of her character, Faris admits “She’s so dimensional and a mess…basically like me”. Addressing her longevity in the business and getting that first job, she explains “I slowly came to realize that getting your first job is hard but not as hard as the second one” because “you have to peddle yourself around town”. At this point in her career, she says “there is a difference in that you graduate as a woman into a different element in your 30s”. Asked to what her mom might think of her portrayal on-screen in this series, Faris jokes that “my mom is a prude but half the time she doesn’t know what the vocabulary means” adding that “she says she’s never seen a condom”. Chuck Lorre, who continues to build his empire here after the successes of “Two &A Half Men”, “Big Bang Theory” and recently “Mike & Molly”, concludes with the admission that “I once asked Norman Lear what he did [with all his shows] and he said you go where the fire is burning the brightest and where you are most needed”.

homeland-showtime-tca-2013

Showtime swoops with interest into the battle with the return of “Homeland” and the texture of how you change up the show with two red hot Emmy winners on the roll. Claire Danes, whose lead character is always on the verge of exploding, says that “Carrie is always sitting on her own personal ticking bomb” adding that “it is an impossible dilemma”. In terms of the recent progression, she continues that Carrie “is not great on the meds and she is even worse off them” posing that “it is pretty bleak”. When asked about her recent quotes about having trouble finding work after her lauded performance as “Temple Gradin” for HBO before she started “Homeland”, she explains that after the former, “I think I emerged energized and emboldened” and “I wanted a similar type of challenge” but “there wasn’t any roles like that” adding that “I didn’t have patience for the regular old stuff”. She says that she guesses “there was a dirth of material in general at that moment” but, for her, “to do a job for the sake of it is a really bad idea”. She postulates that ”we are freelance, dare I say, artists”. Despite the bent of this series, she says “I have not become a political creature” though, for this season, “I have returned to my bipolar books” admitting “they are right near the bed” because “it is our job to interpret the heavy lifting the writers do”. Damian Lewis, for his part as Brody, is not seen for the first two episodes of the new season, which is unusual for the most recent Emmy winning Best Actor – Drama, but he says “it is a function of the story that we have to see Brody”. He explains with a little chicanery that “he disappeared into a tunnel system” because “he is the most wanted criminal in the world so he has to lay low”. Asked whether he sees his character’s bleak end coming in droves, he jokes that “these guys [the creators] have been trying to kill me since Episode One”.

masters-of-sex-showtime-2013

Masters Of Sex” continues the predilection with an piercing view into taboo and science in the late 40s with a kind of voyeurism that apparently pushes the boundary. Michael Sheen, who plays the lead character Bill who is studying the science of human sexuality in a conservative time, says that, with the series, it is about seeing the time as “prudish” but more about seeing it as a journey about “a sense of control in this man’s life” since “he is a mystery to himself”. The idea for him of this man is that “he has a locked-down desire to keep control”. In comparing the sense of sexuality to our perception of sex today, he explains “the same problem of intimacy applies now”. The key is “with the sexuality of the piece, it has to be realistic” but “your have to find a way to set the tone with all the right things” adding that “you discover through experimentation”. In terms of his relationship with his study partner Jane (played by Lizzy Caplan), he says “you find your way with the chemistry” because “the humor comes out of the situation” because (let’s face it), “it is interesting how sex is done on-screen” but “there is an awkwardness”. From his perspective, in “Masters Of Sex”, “there are a lot risks, not just the nudity”. What he likes about this character and the challenge is that “in the multiple episodic format, you can get to the complexity of a novel”. The disconnect for Bill, he says, is that “he tries to keep sex and attraction separate”. As for his view on sex after doing the series, he says “I found myself talking about relationships more” because “the more you are doing [or watching] a show about sex, you are finding more how you connect with human beings”. The take-away is that “sex is a conduit for any area you feel shame about”.

masters-of-sex-showtime-2013-2

Lizzy Caplan, from her point of view playing a period woman after she had played many outspoken modern women, says “when you are telling a story in present day, you can [show the modern woman] with clothes and a strategically placed tattoo”. With all the sex and nudity floating throughout the series, she says “some of the situations were ridiculous but accurate” but “there are moments of levity”. She says “the idea of Jane is that every step of the way she is a contradiction” using the comparisons that “she is a secretary but she is also a partner” and that “she is sexually adventurous but she is a mother of two” and most specifically “she becomes close with Liddy [Bill’s wife] but she is also the other woman”. What throws her is that people were told different underlying falsehoods about sex (like masturbation) and, as she puts it, “you just needed to tell people that what you were doing was normal but people weren’t doing that…and that is some bullshit!”

tomorrow-people-tca-2013

CW closes out with the consideration of “The Tomorrow People” which is based upon a series that Greg Berlanti (who also produces the CW’s “Arrow”) saw as a kid. He speaks of it with glee saying “Julie [Line, the exec producer] and I have been talking about this show since we were in college” adding that “the originals played in reruns on Nickelodeon”. Mark Pellegrino, recently of “Lost” as Jacob, returns to genre here with a multi-facade character teasing that “I don’t consider myself the hero of the story right now” but explaining that “I am protecting the human race and you have to do dirty things”.

The triumvirate in CBS, Showtime & CW continues to show that the separation of brand and knowing the angle at which to engage the audience is decidedly important in facilitating bigger and bigger ratings.

%d bloggers like this: