Brian Dreger has yet another great question…
I was reading in your archives about how you "developed" a Dungeons & Dragons cartoon, but the actual cartoon was "created" by someone else. Why wouldn't the creator also develop it (and what is the difference)?
It seems to me that, although the idea is obviously important, figuring out just how the show would work (especially since it was based on a game) would be more important than what the creator did in this case (and also a form of "creating" it). I don't understand why someone would create something and then pass it off to someone else (is it like penciling a comic book and then passing it off to an inker…more work can get done faster?).
Also did you already know about the game or did you have to learn about in order to properly develop it? I can understand developing, say, The Odd Couple TV series from The Odd Couple movie…the developing is pretty much "creating" the TV show. I just don't get how a TV show based on a game can be created and then still require someone to "develop" it.
M*A*S*H was a novel written by a doctor named Hiester Richard Hornberger Jr. who wrote under the name, "Richard Hooker." He sold the movie rights to a movie studio and then either (a) he had no interest in being involved in a movie or (b) the studio didn't want him involved in case they wound up changing it a lot or (c) they wanted an experienced screenwriter on the job. I think in this case, it was all three. They hired Ring Lardner Jr. to write the screenplay and later, Larry Gelbart to perform the surgery necessary to make it work as a half-hour TV show.
In the case of The Odd Couple, Neil Simon probably didn't want to soil his hands working in sitcoms and I believe the deal he made with Paramount for the movie rights allowed them to do a TV show without him. He and the studio probably preferred it that way.
What may be confusing you here, Brian, is an assumption that these titles mean the same thing everywhere. They sort of do on a TV show produced under the rules of the Writers Guild. I will way oversimplify and say that if you wrote the pilot for a TV show and it was completely original, you would be entitled to the "created by" credit. If it was based in any way on pre-existing material (a movie, a book, etc.) then the credit would be "developed by."
Example: Gelbart got a "developed by" credit for the M*A*S*H TV series since it was based on pre-existing material. He got a "created by" credit on his later TV series, United States since it was not.
In an animated series not done under WGA jurisdiction — and Dungeons & Dragons was not — there are no such rules. My agent negotiated for my credit on that series. It was appropriate because I did not invent all those characters or the format. There had been several scripts by several different writers before me and CBS had not been willing to commit to the show until I did a bible and pilot script that changed or excised a lot of things that others had put in before me.
The credits on the show look like this. If you watch an episode, you may need a speed-reading course to see what they say…
Kevin's name was bigger than Dennis's and I would assume that was also the result of some lawyer or agent negotiations. I don't think I've ever met Kevin Paul Coates and I really have no idea what he did on the show. It may well have been substantial but it was before my involvement.
Dennis Marks was a friend of mine and a terrific writer but he was largely off the project before I was called in on it. We talked about it but not much. He was busy with another show at the time.
Dennis had worked on the development and pilot script of a show a year or two before that NBC did not pick up called something like Monsters and Magic. It was a show about kids getting trapped in a game like Dungeons & Dragons but without direct reference to that famous and successful game. I never saw any of that development but I was told elements of it had found their way into the Dungeons & Dragons presentation when Marvel's animation studio secured those rights.
I also had never played Dungeons & Dragons but I knew enough about it. I was, after all, not hired to create a game. I was hired to create or modify characters in a standalone context that used some elements of the game.
From my standpoint, I was handed a whole pile of scripts and outlines and bibles and drawings by a whole bunch of folks and I was told, "Turn this into something that CBS will buy…and you have about three days to do it in." And for doing that, I received the fee and the credit that my agent had demanded for my services and he got 10% of that fee.
The point is that I did not get the credit because some Higher Authority had looked over the whole project and assessed what each contributor had done and decided to award me that credit. I got it because my agent negotiated it. There was no governing body or rulebook as there is when the Writers Guild decides the credit on a script under its jurisdiction.
There has never been any such body or rulebook for credits in comic books or most animation. Leon Schlesinger, who owned the cartoon studio but did not write or draw, was often credited as the creator of Bugs Bunny. Others who worked for the studio could just say "I created Bugs Bunny" (and many did) because there was no formal, official credit established…
…and when one is on a property in animation or comics, it's often a contractual matter that may or may not reflect reality. Bob Kane negotiated a "created by" credit on Batman and any character added to the Batman comics. The contract was amended a few years ago so Bill Finger could be included but before that, if you'd created a new master villain for the Caped Crusader to fight, DC Comics was contractually obligated to say it was "Created by Bob Kane."
The lack of any rules or arbiters in comics has caused all manner of anger and frustration and certain folks being denied credit and/or compensation for what they did. It's why at one point, Martin Goodman — then the Publisher at what we now know as Marvel Comics — was the "creator" of Captain America. No one believes that. No one ever believed that…but there was nothing to stop it. It's why Stan Lee could, until there were legal settlements that stopped it, sometimes be billed as — or bill himself as — sole creator of properties that he, at best, co-created.
It is sometimes confusing and even when there is a system in place to determine credit, the system isn't perfect. But what you need to remember is that such credits do not magically appear, nor are they handed down on stone tablets. There are reasons for them and sometimes, those reasons differ depending on how the determination is being made and who's doing it.
