Mr. Balcer: Our Interview Nov 2006

Criminal Intent Questions

You are credited twice in each episode. Once for "Developed By" and the other "Consulting Producer". Is the CP credit just an honorary thing or are you still with the show in a different position? If you are still with the show, how involved are you with the writing?

A: You’re talking about my credits in season 6. The “Developed by” credit is another way of saying “Co-Created by”, since for contractual reasons, Dick had to be the only name listed on the “Created by” card in the opening titles. The CP credit isn’t just an honorary thing, since I do consult with various people on the show and at the studio/network, and I also consult on the international productions of CI. As far as the writing goes, I have consulted when asked. It’s like your best friend’s marriage – don’t give unsolicited advice.

Why did you leave CI? What happened?

A: We (meaning the studio – NBC-Universal Television Studios, that is -- and I) were on our way to reaching an agreement for me to stay on, when NBC (the network) got the bad news that its revenue for the coming season wasn’t going to be what they expected. As a consequence, they needed to make big cuts across the board – and I happened to be a big fat slab of meat on that board. CI is an expensive show to produce (as are most fifth/sixth-season shows). Since NBC (the network) is on the hook for LOCI’s production costs and since they have a legitimate need to get a certain monetary return on the show, it made financial sense to make personnel changes to reduce costs. You can’t really argue with that logic, and since I have a significant vested interest in seeing LOCI stay on the air, I prefer cost-cutting to canceling the show. Not to mention it’s nice to get a break after working a hundred hours a week for six years.

What are your feelings for the new format the show has taken? Was it yours, Dick Wolf's or Warren Leight's decision? What would you have done differently if it was your decision, taking into consideration that Dick Wolf wanted a major change.

A: As I said, I’m not going to comment on what my successor has done. But, since I’m no longer showrunner, any decision to make changes would be Dick’s call and his alone.

How do you feel about the stalker cam? The use of sexualized violence? Do you find the amount of violence gratuitous, or something needed to boost ratings? Since the beginning, great emphasis was placed on the fact that LOCI was different from the others in the sense that we saw the criminal’s intent. It seems lately that that is no longer of considerable importance. Therefore, I would like to ask… what is your opinion on the new method of storytelling? And the changes to the characters you nurtured for the past five years?

A: See previous answer.

Sherlock Holmes has been mentioned by Mr. Wolf and you as an influence on the character of Goren. Could you address how much of and in what ways Holmes was an influence?

A: When Dick and I first talked about this show, Sherlock Holmes’ name never came up. Though both Dick and I had read the Holmes books when we were kids, Holmes really wasn’t on our mind at that point. I had other models in mind.

Dick had given me an outline for the pilot episode (“One”). Though this outline concerned a jewelry heist, the first act was told entirely from the bad guys’ point of view; the two detectives came in late into the story and their investigatory methods resembled those used by the detectives on the original Law & Order (basically the usual follow-the-breadcrumbs who/what/where/when investigation); the fourth act was a primarily a legal act, with lots of legal stuff; and the case was resolved by the bad guy literally getting run over by a taxi. Since I didn’t want to repeat what I’d done on Law & Order, I decided to change the way the cops operated, and make one of them the lead character. Along with other changes in the outline, I wanted to make this a character-driven procedural in the sense that the investigation would reflect our main detective’s idiosyncratic character.

When I reworked the outline, I patterned Goren on Dr. Park Dietz, the noted forensic psychiatrist. I was also inspired by the real-life psychiatrist played by Max Sydow in HBO’s “Citizen X”. I wanted Goren to be a skilled reader of human behavior; to be a generalist and to have all kinds of arcane knowledge acquired during a variety of investigations – that paralleled my experience as a writer, since writers have to become instant experts on whatever subjects they write about. And I wanted him to be compassionate and empathetic. I also wanted him to crack each case by turning the suspect’s own psychology against him – so in the pilot, I came up with the idea of Goren turning the jewel thief’s girlfriend against him by first dissecting her relationship with him, showing her the truth of her boyfriend’s pathology and then lying to her about AIDS. I always liked writing interrogation scenes – in fact I wrote Law & Order’s first long interrogation scene in “Vengeance”. I decided that in LOCI, the fourth act should resolve itself in an aria, a masterful interrogation by Goren.

If any fictional detective inspired me, it was more consciously Maigret and Philip Marlow (my dad was a huge fan of Maigret). I’ve also been inspired by other fictional detectives from Japanese and Scandinavian literature. Detective fiction is probably the most elastic of all genres – just about every country has its own detective fiction, and the way the detectives solve crimes highlights the unique psychological and social aspects of that culture. But since Holmes was the first behaviorist detective, it’s inevitable that Goren would be compared with him. It was only after the first few episodes were written, during a conversation between myself, Dick and Vincent, that Holmes’ name first came up.

Would it be possible for you to discuss Dr. Park Dietz and how he affected the development of Goren and LOCI?

A: Dr. Dietz was closely consulted when I developed Goren’s character. For example, it was Park who suggested that Goren should carry a binder rather than the small notebook cops usually carry. He explained that, while cops envision five or six motives for any crime, forensic psychiatrists (by virtue of their experience and training) envision thousands of motives. Consequently, they tend to ask more questions and make more observations at a crime scene than your garden-variety cop. As a result, they need a bigger notebook, and they carry more files with them to consult.

How did the casting of Mr. D'Onofrio, Ms. Erbe, or any of the actors affect the characters?

A: There was an evolution as the strengths of each actor became more obvious – for example when I saw that Kathryn Erbe was terrific at delivering wise-ass zingers, I started writing more snarks for her. In Vincent’s case, it was the fact that he is such a terrific physical actor and is brilliant in his use of props – that opened a whole new aspect to Goren’s character. For example, in “The Faithful”, Stephanie S. had written a brilliant little bit that had Goren climbing up on the back of a pew to get a camera angle. But Vincent added the funny touch of using a cop’s head to steady himself.

There have been some great guest stars on the show. How were some of them convinced to appear? Do you have some favorite performances?

A: The casting kudos have to go to my producing partner Fred Berner. And there wasn’t a lot of convincing to do – actors like the show, they have good characters to play.

BTW, LOCI would not have made it through 5 seasons if it weren’t for Fred Berner. As much as anybody else, he was responsible for the show’s success and for keeping the show from going off the rails. I can think of no better partner (creatively and business-wise) for a writer/producer to have. He was/is an excellent dramaturge -- his notes on every script improved every episode (one small example – remember in “Pas De Deux”, when Vincent tangos in the interrogation room with the perp? That was Fred’s idea)

Did you have an idea of how you wanted to see Criminal Intent end? If so, how would you leave the characters of Goren and Eames? How would the Nicole Wallace storyline be wrapped up?

A: Of course I have an idea about each one of those storylines. But I will keep them to myself for now.

You have had a large number of women writers over the years on Criminal Intent, which is unusual in television. Can you comment on why you think women have been so suited to writing this series?

A: It came about by happenstance. When staffing a show (looking for writers), the showrunner reads reading samples submitted by agents. Writers will write a sample episode of an existing show to demonstrate that they have mastered the TV form and that they write according to the voice of this or that show. This is supposed to show what great TV writers they are, but it usually just demonstrates what good mimics they are. I also read plays, feature film scripts, etc. Anyway, I found that male writers tended to stick with the tried-and-true, their writing samples didn’t take many chances. Women writers on the other hand tended to swing for the bleachers; they took a lot of creative chances and pushed the envelope in terms of character and story. For example, Stephanie wrote a sample episode of “The Sopranos” that had Little Tony following his dad’s mistress home and ending up in her bedroom almost being seduced by her – he has a premature “accident” from just sitting next to her and leaves in a hurry. It was hilarious, totally authentic and daring. Another example, Marlane Meyer had written a pilot for an HBO show about a very tough female cop, her script pulled no punches and avoided every cliché – and most notably she had a great ear and feel for people living on the margins of society. Long story short, at the end of the day, there were more samples from women writers in my “good” pile than from male writers. It was LOCI’s good fortune that we ended up with such a formidable group of writers: Marlane Meyer, Stephanie Sengupta, Diana Son, Gina Gionfriddo, Theresa Rebeck, Liz Benjamin…

It also happened that most of them are playwrights. I didn’t set out to hire playwrights per se, but of course they would be a perfect fit for a character-driven dialogue-rich television show. And playwrights tend to write to subtext, which is good for a show with plenty of bottom. Another good thing is that playwrights know other playwrights – and so it was Theresa Rebeck who recommended Warren Leight to me; Marlane Meyer and Warren recommended Diana Son (based on her breakthrough play “Stop Kiss”) and so on. LOCI became known as a show friendly to young playwrights, and so agents referred their playwright-clients to me, which is how Gina Gionfriddo came to my attention (I read her terrific play “After Ashley” – Gina didn’t disappoint: She’d never written a TV episode or film script before but her first episode for me, “Beast”, was a home run).

Were you able to pick your successor before leaving the series, or was the decision to promote Leight made after your departure?

A: For a variety of reasons (namely that he’s talented, he seemed to posses the managerial qualities needed of a showrunner -- and seemed to want the job), I thought that Warren had the potential to become showrunner in a year or so (if the show went to a seventh season). His taking over in June came as a bit of a surprise to both of us.

Please explain what happened that led up to a fan vote on Nicole Wallace's fate. How exactly did YOU originally plan for that storyline to go, and what led up to the decision to leave it up to the fan vote?

A: Difficult as it might be for some to accept, it was not the result of some calculated grab for ratings. It really came about by accident as a way to resolve a creative logjam. The episode was shot before our summer break, with one ending (she gets away). But as usually happens when things lie around, we started tinkering with it, and someone suggested that we shoot another ending where Nicole gets killed. So what the hell, it’s only money. We shot another ending, one that worked, that was somewhat emotionally satisfying. Anyway, it was a discussion piece. Some people at Wolf were pulling for one ending, the network was pulling for another. So two weeks before we were about to air, I suggested, why not run a different ending on each coast and let the fans decide by a vote on the Web – I thought it would be interesting and anarchic to use a big media corporation and billions of dollars of technology to do a referendum on the death penalty, albeit for a fictional character. Think of it as a kind of performance art. Emotions concerning Nicole had been running high anyway, so I wanted to see if people would really vote to kill her off. I suspected they might not.

The network liked the idea – it was a way to get the show in the spotlight and a way to get people to log on to their new website. Dick liked the idea because nothing like it had ever been tried. I liked the idea because of its serendipitous element; luck often plays a part in finding solutions to creative problems. For example, I got the idea of finding the kidnapper/rapist in “Homo Homini Lupus” through his unique cellphone ring while I was standing in line for a visa in the Chinese Consulate in Los Angeles listening to everyone’s individualized ringtones.

In any event, during the run-up to the airing of the episode, I got an even better idea of how to wrap up the Goren-Nicole story. But that will have to wait.

What was the cast and crew reaction like to the Nicole Wallace vote result/neverending story? Was it gratifying to know how invested fans are with the show, or a little scary that we take it so seriously?

A: The crew is usually too busy slogging through the long workday to pay attention to that stuff. But Vincent was very jazzed by the whole experiment. And yes, it’s always nice to know someone’s paying attention.

What is your opinion of the nemesis angle in general? How do you feel about Logan now also getting his own nemesis to deal with?

A: Since I gave Logan a nemesis, I guess I feel pretty good about nemeses in general. For a non-serialized drama, especially one that doesn’t go home with the characters, it can be dramatically useful to give your hero a recurring nemesis – it allows you to explore aspects of your hero’s personality that you wouldn’t be able to otherwise. And it allows for a certain depth and resonance to the relationship between hero and nemesis.

When doing stories about especially sensitive "ripped from the headlines" subjects, was there ever any consideration about how much time has passed since the actual event in consideration of victim's family members? I mention this because there has been some discussion about the episode "In the Wee Small Hours" which was based in part on the Natalie Holloway case. Considering this is still an open case, and also considering she went missing only months before ITWSH aired, is timing ever a consideration for dealing with such topics?

A: Yes, of course, there is some thought that goes into it.

It seems like there has been a lot more promotion of CI than I can remember in the past. Add to that a new NBC message board, previews of upcoming episodes, etc, it seems like NBC has finally acknowledged fan interest in CI. Do you have an explanation for this development?

A: The show got a lot of promotion during its first two seasons (remember the summer “Intent-a-thon” on NBC?). By the third season, with CI consistently winning its timeslot and the night (with ratings of 5.5 in the valuable 18-49 demos and viewership in the 15-16 million range), NBC started to spend its promotional dollars on its new shows. That pattern continued during seasons 4 and 5. Then last spring, NBC decided to revamp the NBC website and add all kinds of features: All the shows were asked to come up with an Internet angle – I suggested the “LOCI: Hard Evidence/Captain’s briefing” game. So it wasn’t a matter of NBC suddenly focusing on CI, all their shows got new promotion.


LOCI has been woefully neglected by the Emmys and Golden Globes. Why do you think that is? I found it especially absurd that Tony Shaloub's Monk was greeted as the greatest quirky detective in eons, when Goren had been on the scene for a couple of seasons. What gives? Is this the Curse of the Spin-off? Something else?

A: The curse of the spin-off indeed. But CI has been recognized by the Mystery Writers of America and been awarded many nominations and an Edgar from them, we’ve gotten awards/noms from the Banff TV festival, from Planned Parenthood (for “The Third Horseman”), etc. Since I received a lot of “hardware” (statuettes, awards, plaques, etc.) from my days on “Law & Order”, I don’t miss it, but I feel bad for the LOCI writers, actors, directors and producers who really deserved to have been nominated in years past.

Personal Questions

What exactly is the job of a show runner?

A: I answered some of this question earlier. Let me add that a showrunner is responsible for making sure the voice and tone of the show is consistent from episode to episode. If you’re the creator of that show, no one knows that voice better than you. That applies to the characters’ voices as well – the showrunner should know them better than anyone. So part of my duties, maybe the most important one, was to make sure each episode conformed to the series’ voice; that Goren’s and Eames’s voices were consistent from episode to episode; that scenes laid out in a manner consistent with the show; that the investigation/deductions/plot turns conformed to the format we set out; that a certain degree of realism and authenticity was maintained; that the squadroom and crime scenes played naturally; that exposition (to keep the plot moving) was feathered in elegantly; that our main characters remained pro-active and drove the action; that scenes remained tight and forward-moving; that scenes contained conflict (either through a clash of purpose or ideas); that the audience didn’t get too far ahead or behind our heroes, that confusions were clarified; that dialogue remained sharp, expressive and natural while using simple language; that the arias were well structured, gathered up the skeins and landed to dramatic effect. And that the show remained a psychological mystery, revealing as much about the antagonist’s psyche as it did Goren’s, without devolving into clumsy melodrama. The showrunner ought to know the show better than anyone, and ought to be able to write it better than anyone -- that’s his/her job, that’s what he/she gets paid for.

It’s probably no great secret that every script went through my computer at some point. Every writer on the staff brought different things to the table -- my job was to hold on to all the good things in their drafts while addressing those things that didn’t reflect the voice of the show (again, because of time constraints, writers can’t sit with their drafts and rewrite them ad infinitum). As much as possible, I rewrote while keeping those elements from the writer that made his or her script unique -- the goal wasn’t to obliterate the writer’s personality. If you look through the episodes, there are consistent elements that distinguish a Meyer episode from a Sengupta, a Conway script from a Son. The writers’ personalities, their take on life, their concerns, came through in their scripts and were preserved in the rewrites.

One attribute essential for a showrunner is absolute loyalty to his/her writing staff. When a script is poorly received by the studio or the network, some showrunners are quick to duck responsibility and shove blame on the writer; they’ll say things like, “You should see what I had to work with,” or “He (or she) gave me his draft late,” conveniently forgetting that it’s the showrunner’s responsibility to approve the story, give notes to the writer at every stage of the process and rewrite the script before it’s read by the studio/network, and that it’s the showrunner’s responsibility to make sure drafts are delivered on time. Other showrunners will badmouth their writers to other writers on the staff, or publicly humiliate their writers. Or at the first sign of trouble, the showrunner will throw the writer in front of the bus. These showrunners forget that when they run into a problem (i.e. a draft comes in that doesn’t work, or a writer gets sick and can’t deliver on time, or the network drops an impossible deadline in their lap), it’s their writing staff that will get them out of trouble.

Finally, as far as the studio and network are concerned, the overriding responsibility of the showrunner is to make sure the episodes are delivered on time and on budget. That starts with having the script ready for pre-production on time. If that domino doesn’t fall right, it affects everything else down the line – casting can’t start until there’s a complete script, locations can’t be scouted, sets can’t be built, etc. What you end up with is a rushed and expensive mess -- one that gets messier as the season progresses.


How do you approach emotionally charged issues in a storyline?

A: It depends on the issue. But I try to never succumb to clichés or take the easy way out.
I’m particularly happy we addressed issues raised by the so-called war on terrorism, and especially the Iraq war and the treatment of detainees. We found ways of going at it directly (“Stress Position”, “The Pilgrim”, “Scared Crazy”) and indirectly (“Saving Face”, “The Good”). And much to their credit, Dick and the network never asked me to back off. Even when I took a shot at Tom DeLay, the network backed me up.


What contemporary television writers and/or playwrights and/or screenwriters do you admire, and why?

A: Answering this question can only bring me grief. I’ll sample new TV shows (ten minutes is enough to know what you need to know about a show) but I really don’t watch much TV other than the news, Jon Stewart, Bill Maher and the History Channel, there’s just no time. Since I practically grew up in a library, I’d rather spend my free at-home time reading.

That being said, I have to give a nod to my LOCI writers – they’re admirable not just because they put up with me for five years, but because they’re incredibly talented, imaginative and passionate people who care deeply about their work. They each have their own areas of special interest which they mine to great effect (i.e. Gerry Conway – group dynamics, sub-cultures; Diana Son – family/marriage, emotional repression); they’re funny (Marlane Meyer and Charlie Rubin write some of the funniest out-of-left-field dialogue); they’re inventive and observant (Jim Sterling basically sold me in our first meeting when he told me that you can tell if someone’s right or left handed just by looking at their teeth); they have boundless energy (five minutes with Diana Son is better than a case of Red Bull); they’re consummate pros (I quickly found out why Gerry has been making a living as a writer since he was 15 – for every one of his ideas that got shot down, he’d come up with ten more; he’d finish one script and immediately start work on his next one); and they rose to every challenge (After we got a late go-ahead from the network, Stephanie wrote “ITWSH” on a few weeks’ notice – an episode Dick called the best two-part episode ever produced by any of the three L&Os, including the cross-overs; For “The Saint”, in addition to writing the script, Marlane had to compose a convincing original poem in the voice and style of a 19th Century poet – which she did, successfully and on schedule).


What's your all-time favorite television series?

A: My favorites probably aren’t so different from those of any other viewer of my vintage.

What are some of your favorite films?

A: Too many to name.


What advice would you give to a cathartic writer; one that gets inspired in a flash and can't stop writing until the inspiration has dried out and subsequently hit a dry spell and can't write for months? What's the trick to write consistently, day in day out?

A: There is no trick other than to just start writing every day. Just like there’s no trick to exercising every day, you just have to start doing it -- and the more you do it, the easier it is TO do it every day. Inspiration is always there, in some part of your brain, the problem is accessing it. Writing is like a muscle -- you need to exercise it. Every writer goes through some routine to get him/herself into a writing head, to open up the “neural” paths to your writing mojo. If you write every day, and do that warm-up routine, pretty soon you’ll be getting into your writing head faster, as everything will become more accessible.


When you write something - how many drafts do you typically go through until the final product & how much (i.e. 20%, 50%) is usually changed from the first "pen to paper" draft?

A: I rewrite as I write. When I start my writing day, I’ll first go over the last couple of scenes I wrote the day before, just to get myself in the mood. Anyway, the net effect is, by the time I get to the end of the piece, I don’t have a huge amount of rewriting to do. I also write from a pretty detailed outline (parts of which I might discard as I go). When writing for film or TV, it’s really helpful to do an outline first, especially for a tightly-plotted show.


When a work of yours is processed further down the line & you think the changes fundamentally alter what you were creating .... how do you mentally handle that?

A: For the last eleven years or so, no one’s been rewriting me, and I’ve had control over final edits. So, for better or worse, I have no one to blame but myself if something doesn’t work.

Now, you might want to ask the other LOCI writers how they felt about being re-written. I can’t imagine any self-respecting writer would enjoy the process – but it’s a process that’s evolved on TV because of lack of time for a writer to really digest his/her script, and gain enough distance from it to rewrite it. There’s just no time, so it’s faster for someone else (i.e. me) to see what works and what doesn’t and fix it.


Do you have any favorite CI episodes, some that you feel worked exceptionally well? If so, what are they and why are they your favorites?

A: Well, I love all my children equally, and I’d defend all the episodes I was responsible for (seasons 1-5). There’s something about every episode that I really like (personally I think “The View From Up Here” and “Scared Crazy” are the most misunderstood and under-appreciated episodes of the series – there was a terrific critique of “The View…” written by a film critic, comparing it favorably with the best of contemporary Japanese horror films). That being said, my favorites aren’t so different from the ones I see listed on the board.


Do you think the FCC rules are too rigid for broadcast TV compared with cable TV or in comparison with other countries? What elements would you like to be able to make your characters say/do that you are not allowed to?

A: You work with what you’ve got. BTW, cable has its own rules and restrictions too, even Pay TV channels demand a certain amount of this and that, and they have their own taboos. It’s not like Michelangelo had a free hand when he painted the Sistine Chapel. There’s nothing that I’ve wanted to do with my characters that I wasn’t allowed to do.


What other media would you like to tackle?

A: I have feature film projects, as well as book, Internet and comic book projects.


Michael Moriarty recently announced his plans to run for president in 2008. What do you think of this and can he count on your support?

A: Being neither a lamppost nor a bar stool, I won’t be supporting Michael.


How does your work as a news cameraman relate to your work as a writer?

A: I wasn’t a news cameraman, I was a combat cameraman for a very short period in my life; I also made documentaries, worked on a newspaper and edited a medical/financial magazine. These were all opportunities to experience realities that I wouldn’t have been able to otherwise. That’s invaluable to a writer. There are many other jobs and experiences I treasure for the same reason – working in a sawmill in Northern Quebec, working in construction in Canada’s Northwest Territories, being a sous-chef in a mob-run restaurant on Cape Cod, hopping freights across Canada, working in a jazz club (notable accomplishment -- I rescued Dizzy Gillespie’s cigar from the trash!), and – very relevant to my current project – working in the psychiatric wing of a Montreal hospital, among other oddball jobs. And this was before any adventures in Mondo Hollywood.


You said you read Maigret, don't you think that Simenon made him a little too misogynous?

A: Well, he is a product of his time and culture. Ultimately, I think he’s more misanthropic than misogynistic.


What makes a good writer, other than yourself, for Criminal Intent? And, more generally, what makes a good television drama writer?

A: Thick skin.


Will you continue to work in television on different series?

A: Yes, for as long as I’m invited to the party. I’m developing two series – I think that’s been mentioned on the board. But there’s many a slip…


What events in your life do you feel have had a major influence on your writing?

A: Every event has had an influence. But as it relates to “Law & Order” in particular, one event does stand out. I grew up in Quebec, Canada. In 1970, a “terrorist” group advocating Quebec independence from Canada kidnapped a British diplomat and a Quebec minister, and issued demands. I come from a political family, one of my uncles was a minister in the Canadian government, and one of my cousins was a member of the terrorist cell responsible for the kidnappings (and murder of one of the hostages). Anyway, overnight, our very liberal Canadian Prime Minister abandoned his principles, invoked something called The War Measures Act, suspended all civil liberties and proceeded to arrest hundreds of suspected sympathizers of the terrorists (including notable artists, writers, singers, actors, union activists, etc.). Troops occupied Montreal and patrolled the streets, stopping anyone they deemed suspicious. Yours truly was picked up late one night while returning home from his girlfriend’s house (I was sixteen) because he shared the same last name as one of the terrorist suspects. There followed a very unpleasant overnight stay as a guest of the Canadian military and Montreal police. Bottom line, I got a vivid demonstration that even in the most benign and progressive of societies, how gossamer-thin is the envelope of civil rights that protects us, and how quickly principles are shed and power abused when fear overcomes common sense. This informed much of my writing for Jack McCoy.


What is it that stirs you to write? Do you have a personal philosophy or view of human nature?

A: If I do, it’s all there in the writing.

wow! Just terrific. thanks so much!

WOW! Thank you so much, moderators and Mr. Balcer, what a great honor it has been.

I always thought RB a class act, now it has been confirmed in my mind.

Mr. Balcer, you mentioned a book, pretty please!

Madger

How many times do you have to say thank you to demonstrate your true appreciation? Thank you mods and thank you M. Balcer!

So much stuff to digest, it was a two part read for me.

Some funnies; some wastes but mostly gems...and now I'm stuck with 1000 follow-up questions and no one to answer them.

Let's analyze! Too much?? Ah! I don't care!

I enjoyed the intrusion into the writer's mind. M. Balcer struck me as a person who likes things expressed in half tones; as opposed to bright, in your face colours. Some of his answers carried a subtle and mysterious aura around them. He had my undivided attention in his too short explanation about nemeses. The resonance between a character and his creator was a pure gem in this interview, and the acknowledgment that if it exists at this level; it is bound to exist between a character and a viewer was very noble on his part. Relinquishing a character, first to actors, then to viewers must be very difficult. There is an undeniable link between a writer and his/her characters and being able to surrender them to a herd of unforgiving viewers is a huge leap of faith!

I don’t get why he chose questions he had no intention to answer. I understood from the first answer that he didn't want to comment the show's current situation, so why the repetitions? Those were wasted questions for me!

No personal questions were answered, so I guess Balcer likes keeping his private garden... well private! Yet, he told us directly about a personal moment in his teenaged years and indirectly gave us another example on how Asian culture influences him. Another direct answer was his admission that Chris Noth, maybe, wasn't the best choice for CI; counterbalanced when he explained in high oblique fashion Nicole’s pathology!

No doubt about CI and Goren’s paternity with this interview; his answers are the mirror reflection of what we used to see on the show, by words or by actions: clarity and transparency; turmoil and impenetrability; direct approach and indirect approach. The man is as open as he is mysterious; which, in an interview situation, leaves the interviewer with an unappeased curiosity; yet, in a real situation, makes for an appealing character.

...and Maigret misanthropic? Yes, I’ll buy that...with an obtuse propensity towards specific people and to a lesser degree towards himself. A biased misanthropic, but aren’t we all?