So last evening I was mulling over our current situation here in the US, and got this idea for a concept for a TV series I originally called "Citizen", - digging into the origins of the Greco-Roman ideals of rights and fairness which have been deeply ingrained even into our modern legal systems. Although we all know those ideals have been tarnished in recent years. Consider though the number of legal buildings (courthouses and state buildings) here in our modern era that have Greco-Roman architectural themes.
I tossed around the idea of an ancient "Law and Order", behind the scenes look at what the judicial system might have actually looked like in ancient times. The "judge" is really called a PRAETOR.
I started working the idea into Claude to do research on the theme overall, and we worked up a great series call PRAETOR. "Wow - interesting ... tapped into something here ..."
Claude:
"What you're talking about is the concept of "Civis Romanus sum" (I am a Roman citizen)—three of the most powerful words in the ancient world. Roman citizenship guaranteed rights that were revolutionary:
-
- Right to trial
- Right to appeal (provocatio)
- Protection from arbitrary punishment
- Access to legal representation
- Due process
-
The Twelve Tables (450 BC) were Rome's first written law code, making law accessible to all citizens, not just the elite. This was the birth of "rule of law" as we know it.
The Perfect Historical Role: THE PRAETOR
For your judge character, you want a PRAETOR—specifically a Praetor Urbanus (urban praetor). This is EXACTLY what you're looking for:
The Praetor's Role:
---------- snipped for brevity - full PDFs available for anyone wanting to look at them just let me know ----
[ -- oh yeah it's very good, nerds like me love this stuff - but the ax man cometh -- ]
Then about 20 minutes into knocking it around, I told AI Guy to give me the hard truth about the show's viability.
IMHO - At best: a tax write off or academic exercise.
So while AI Guy liked the concept, he gave me the best analysis that showed me this was not the best idea ...
-
-- Expensive Production Requirements - Period pieces are EXPENSIVE. Rome cost HBO $100M+ for season 1 (2005 dollars—that's $150M+ today).
-
-- Historical Drama Fatigue
The market has seen numerous period dramas in recent years with mixed results:
• Rome (HBO) - Cancelled after 2 seasons despite critical acclaim
• Troy: Fall of a City (BBC/Netflix) - Poorly received, not renewed
• Domina (Sky) - Limited audience
• Barbarians (Netflix) - Moderate success but not breakout
• Those About to Die (Peacock, 2024) - Early numbers underwhelming
Executives see 'Ancient Rome' and worry about expensive productions that don't deliver
modern subscriber numbers. The question will be: 'Why will this work when Rome didn't?'-
Audience Demographics Challenge
PRAETOR appeals to educated, 30-55+ audiences who appreciate historical depth and
intellectual complexity. That's NOT the demographic driving streaming metrics:
• 18-34 demo is king for advertisers and subscriber growth
• Younger audiences prefer fantasy, YA, or contemporary drama
• Legal procedurals skew older (traditional network fare)
• Historical accuracy limits 'modernizing' the content for youth appeal
The pitch will face: 'Who's the audience?' And 'Can you attract younger viewers?'-
Procedural Format Concerns
The Problem:
Procedurals are having a rough time in streaming. Networks (CBS, NBC) still love them, but
streamers are chasing 'event television' and binge-worthy serialized drama:
• Netflix cancelled Mindhunter (brilliant procedural, low viewership)
• Lincoln Lawyer works but isn't a massive hit
• Traditional procedurals struggle to create 'water cooler' moments
• Algorithms favor binge-watching serialized content
-
Final nail in the coffin:
-
The 'Too Smart' Problem
The Problem:There's a real risk that PRAETOR is 'too intellectual' for mass market success. Shows
requiring historical knowledge, legal understanding, and attention to detail often struggle with
broad audiences:
• The Wire - Brilliant, acclaimed, but never a huge hit during its run
• Deadwood - Cancelled after 3 seasons despite critical praise
• The Americans - Respected but modest viewership
These shows found audiences eventually (streaming afterlife, word-of-mouth), but networks
want immediate hits. 'Prestige drama' is a compliment AND a warning.
So while it sounds great in my mind, getting the concept analyzed before I even waste a lot of time on this project is a huge advantage. For me as a writer looking to sell a show, I just saved myself a ton of time and effort on what would essentially be an academic exercise.--
2 people like this
Another analogy I heard about AI ... think of the electric guitar. Les Paul went deep dive on figuring out how to AMPLIFY the sound from guitars. He experimented with a piece of wood, a door hinge and...
Expand commentAnother analogy I heard about AI ... think of the electric guitar. Les Paul went deep dive on figuring out how to AMPLIFY the sound from guitars. He experimented with a piece of wood, a door hinge and other materials. His "early models" were not what folks ultimately made award winning music with.
You pick an electric guitar and play it without an amp, and yes you are creating sound on the strings, but it's not getting very far.
Crank up the amp and the auditorium can be shredded. Does that negate good acoustic work? No. you still have to know how to play.
Does that amp negate good songwriting?
No. In fact, a great amp will amplify your failure very loudly. Garbage in, garbage out. And yes, AI does make some great music too.
So yes, AI can do a lot of what we do, but you still need to know how to write gud.
1 person likes this
https://bricartsmedia.org/ai-in-screenwriting-series-2026/
3 people like this
I think what people dislike so much about AI right now is that its patently incorrect, misleading, and wrong so frequently, in addition to being shallow / surface level in almost every area. It fakes...
Expand commentI think what people dislike so much about AI right now is that its patently incorrect, misleading, and wrong so frequently, in addition to being shallow / surface level in almost every area. It fakes depth and research that anyone using it would be so much better off just researching themselves! It's use is paradoxical in that way, and built for all those friends you had growing up in school that wanted to copy your homework last minute to get a grade. It also isn't even a useful supplemental tool for someone educated on a topic. It's primary usefulness benefits novice/neophyte types who know nothing about a subject who can then press a button and get "up to speed" -- while creating a mass never-ending dunning kruger effect.
Creatively, AI can do very little for you. Sure, we all dream of a idealized future where your own solitary precious thoughts can create worlds and you can have infinite knowledge at your fingertips. That's all great. But that is fundamentally not what these LLMs aka "AI" are capable of right now. They are capable of so much less than that, while using up lots of energy resources that harm our planet and communities. And it's nauseating how anyone who can see AI for what it is right now just has to live with so many people who think it's a "cheat code." It's a cheat code for a race to the bottom. Also, the regulation (or sheer lack thereof) is a massive privacy, safety, and security issue. As Joseph Gordon Levitt so aptly put it "I don't understand why AI companies don’t have to follow any laws."
3 people like this
I think it should be used as a tool but yes, agree, you can see a pattern and it does sounds generic if you ask it for creative things. So, figuring out how to use it to help but not to actually do the work.
4 people like this
I get why people are angry about AI, especially in film and screenwriting. This industry is built on voice, pain, experience, and taste—things you don’t download in an update. I’ve experimented with A...
Expand commentI get why people are angry about AI, especially in film and screenwriting. This industry is built on voice, pain, experience, and taste—things you don’t download in an update. I’ve experimented with AI the same way you test a tool on a workbench: push it, break it, see what it can and can’t do. When it comes to emotion, subtext, and genuinely original storytelling, it falls flat. It can imitate structure, but it can’t mean anything. Anyone who’s tried to get real human truth out of it knows the result feels hollow, mechanical, and honestly a little embarrassing.
That said, I’m not anti-AI—I’m anti-bullshit. I use AI the way a professional uses reference books, research assistants, or Google. It’s useful for logic checks, technical questions, historical context, and learning fast. It’s a calculator, not a conscience. It can help you understand the terrain, but it doesn’t decide where to plant the flag. I don’t let it touch the soul of a screenplay, the character choices, or the emotional architecture. That’s where taste and life experience live—and those are earned, not generated.
So no, I don’t use AI to write screenplays or build story structure for me. I use it to sharpen my thinking, challenge assumptions, and speed up the boring parts so I can spend more time doing the hard, human work. The problem isn’t AI—it’s people trying to replace craft instead of augmenting it. Used wrong, it makes bad writers louder. Used right, it stays invisible and lets the storyteller do what only a human can do: tell the truth in a way that hurts just enough to matter.