The teaser writer David Hoselton envisioned for "Airborne," his third-season episode of House, involved a suspected terrorist — obviously sick, possibly part of a sinister biological warfare plan — entering an airplane at the Singapore airport. Then, House (Hugh Laurie) and Cuddy (Lisa Edelstein) enter the scene and the airplane. Cut to the heartbeat thump of the theme music and credits.
As House fans know, that episode actually opened with sweet, middle-aged Fran (guest star Jenny O'Hara) opening her home to sexy Robin (Meta Golding), who was about to give her a special package deal when her client collapsed. Cut to the heartbeat thump of the theme music and credits.
"So we got lesbian hookers. What? Either something went horribly wrong or horribly right," Hoselton quipped.
His recent session at the Banff World Television Festival delved into how an idea mutates and evolves during the highly collaborative, and highly time- and budget-sensitive, process of writing an episode of television. (See more on the overall process from Hoselton and Desperate Housewives' Jeff Greenstein in From Idea to Screen: The Craft of TV Writing.)
But first, let's back up from that altered teaser to the very beginning: the one-line idea. Or two or three one-line ideas pitched by the individual writer until the executive producers in charge approve the concept. "House on a plane — that was basically my idea. They said 'Okay, got it, good idea, go for it.' That turned into a paragraph, the paragraph turns into a one-page outline, then it turns into a two-to-three pager, then it turns into a 12-page outline, and finally it goes to script if it's approved all down the process, with changes," said Hoselton.
One of the substantial changes came from time and budget pressures. As originally conceived, the entire "Airborne" episode was going to take place airborne. No Fran, no lesbian hooker, and Wilson and the team were supposed to appear only briefly, perhaps on phone consultations, perhaps to break into the patient's home. Unusually for the series, there was no "B story" subplot, only the main "A story" on the plane.
Money changes everything.
The original teaser opened in the Singapore airport. That elicited a flat-out "no." Instead, the episode opens in a house set, and the only hint of an airport is the jet bridge.
More significantly, production told the producers that shooting on an airplane would take twice as long as usual, a back- and bank-breaking 18 days. That meant decreased time for other episodes, and increased costs with a fuselage housed at another studio and a relatively large number of extras.
So creator David Shore instructed his former law school friend to come up with Plan B — to reduce the A story as much as possible and bring in a B story. The B story became the lesbian hooker subplot, which ended up taking up 40 percent of the episode and meant "I had to write two completely different shows, basically, and then put them together," Hoselton sighed.
Article comments
1 - Heidi G.
What a great article! I feel like I was watching "Airbone" behind the scene, which I totally love!
It's a matter of convenience if not budget or money. It's interesting to know the implications or reasons for having a plot or not, or having a character or not.
To me it's very interesting because I was wondering if the "extra" considerations of having Cole in the new team, like a casting for his son and a whole department set, and those sort of things, rendered the character not viable (lol) because even though we had months or years to glimpse anything else beside the hospital other than House's place (Cuddy's house, Cameron and Foreman's apartment); how many episodes until that part of Cole's life has to come up. Of course, I suppose there were a lot more reasons for picking Kutner (or Taub) over Cole, and perhaps none of them had to do with that. LOL!
I'm glad that David Shore, when not writing (or directing), has some say in what happens to his show, he doesn't wash his hands of it.
I wish there were an anatomy of every episode of House. :) Read or see the creative process of actually doing House. That was a great article. Any chances we will see more of these? I'll take any episode. When it's behind the scene, I like them all. (Even S4 >.<)
2 - Diane Kristine
Thanks Heidi, it was fun to hear about and to write, too. There's so much more that goes into an episode than we usually think about as fans so it's fun to get a sneak peek behind the scenes.
It was such a specific set of circumstances that led to this article - I happened to be attending an event where Hoselton happened to be dissecting an episode as an instructional tool for industry types. Some of the DVD commentary gets into a bit of that kind of thing, too, but I'd love to hear more myself. I'm skeptical I'll get many more opportunities like it though!
3 - RealDeal
Well, well this article explains why Airborne was one of the worst episodes ever, right behind ODOR. And Lines in the Sand, almost as bad.
I loved the Wilson side of Airborne, which I've rewatched over and over again BUT the House side just reeked of the ridiculous, especially on an airplane, post 9/11.
4 - May
Diane,
It's always nice to read your article, such a treat, thank you.
I love the behind the scene dissecting of the ep and the story permutation. It's interesting that budget, time, etc. issues could change the outline of the story and even the focus. I also love that David Shore still has firm grasp of what the show is about, since both the examples Hoselton cited are good calls imo.
Wish we get more of this type of articles, not just about House even, any good show will do. It's fascinating to have a peek into the creative process in both writing and producing. It does sound like a constant struggling act, and if people being complacent, then the story will be even more improbable. If TV is like this, and it's a writer's medium to be able to give input and changes, no wonder movie is a even bigger problem without as much writer input.
Again, thanks for the fun read.
5 - Diane Kristine
RealDeal, I'm not sure I follow your logic on how the article explains your dislike? You seem to prefer the parts that were changed. It wasn't my favourite episode but to me, the explanation of how it evolved doesn't really speak to that.
Thanks May! I love hearing about this kind of thing too but like I said, don't know if I'll get the opportunity again, at least not that in-depth. DVD commentary tracks sometimes get into similar territory, though.
6 - Elaine
While I loved the scene where House improvises a diagnostic team from the passengers, this episode will go down as one of my least favorites. I would have loved to have heard Hoselton's explanation for writing the unbelievable and absurd scenes with Chase and Cameron having sex in a SICK WOMAN'S BED and giggling about it afterwards in front of Foreman. That was truly one of the low points of this series and turned me off that romantic pairing forever.
7 - Pat
Thanks for this insight. What goes on behind scenes is often as interesting as what goes on in front of the camera.
I thought Airborne was one of the worst episodes of the season. The medical story was interesting enough but House was a complete jerk (one of the first times I was repelled by him but not the last) and Cuddy brainless as well as spineless. What saved it for me was the story back at PPTH, although I found the Chase/Cameron sex on the patient's bed illogical and out of character, sex teases over story telling. I'm glad the budget restrictions forced them to put in the B story with Wilson and the team. I wish they had spent more time on that and less on showing House abusing Cuddy.