PCM was able to participate in a conference call, along with several other websites, with White Collar creator Jeff Eastin!

Check out what he had to say below!

I was a huge Shield fan. By way, don't tell me because I didn't end up getting to see the final season which I heard was awesome. I'd been playing around with an idea that I'd called ‘redemption' at the time. The idea was sort of a much darker, sort of a Vic Mackey, what would happen if he'd killed his partner and gone to prison. Then, they have to let him out of prison to work with a detective to solve the crime. Then, when it came to that, they decide to put a tracking anklet on him and keep him out. That idea percolated around for a little bit in my head, and somebody had pointed out there was a show called Life that's on that they said, "Hey, that's pretty much exactly the same idea." I had kind of shelved it a little bit.

At that point (I believe this was just before the strike), Travis and I were sitting around discussing kind of what wasn't on the air. The one thing that I hadn't seen for awhile was kind of the buddy show which I was a big fan of. I did an early draft of Rush Hour 3. I did True Life 2 draft for Cameron which was back before Arnold got elected, and that was sort of in my wheelhouse, just the buddy thing. I loved, absolutely loved, Lethal Weapon and 48 Hours. I said, "You know, there's nothing really on TV like this anymore." We kind of looked around and said, "No, there really isn't." We kind of dusted off the redemption idea and said, "What if we took this and turned it into a comedy?"

At that point, I kind of just started in my head trying to figure out who the characters are, and for me, Matt Nix, who created Burn Notice, and I are pretty decent friends. He'd seen the pilot, and he called me and said, "Hey, dig the pilot. I just realized," he said, "Peter Burke, your FBI agent," he goes, "He's you." I was like, "What do you mean?" He's like, "That's your alter ego." He's like, "Michael Weston, my alter ego, and I think Peter's your alter ego."

I thought about it for a little bit, and I realized he's right. With me, Peter, who's sort of more the straight man, is the guy that I am, but I've always been fascinated by the guy who Neal Caffrey is. I've had friends like this. Guys who you could literally parachute them in any place in the world with literally nothing with, just the clothes on their back and by the end of the night, they'd be driving a Bentley and having dinner with the princess in the castle.

I'm not that guy, and I've always sort of been fascinated by people who could pull that off. That was sort of the genesis of the Neal character. Taking a guy who literally just by smiling could pretty much knock down any wall, and the idea of pairing him up with somebody who's kind of the exact opposite seemed like a pretty natural. That's pretty much how the characters evolved. Walked into USA and said, "Hey, I've got an idea for a show," and that was how it started.

We'd started out, and my concept of Neal was what we really sort of thought was a little bit maybe an impossible task. Jeff Artel had said, "You know, what we'd love is a young Warren Beatty." Warren Beatty when he did that screen test back when he was, like 19, 20 years old. There was something just very electric and magnetic about him. That said, I was really hoping we could fine an unknown for the role, and that's a really tough thing to do, somebody very talented, that good looking with that much charisma. Usually those guys are probably working, and they're probably doing features.

We started looking, and I was aware of Matt. I'd heard his name before. I'd seen maybe one or two episodes of Chuck where I kind of had registered him as somebody that was pretty good. He came in and, to our credit, my casting director, Gayle Pillsbury, keep in mind I bet we saw 300 guys pretty easily, and that's who I saw for the producer's session. They saw more guys in the non-producer session, and then kind of whittled it down, and Matt was a good looking guy, but there's a lot of good looking guys in L.A.

As we went through the process, I remember I walked in and Matt, he's kind of an unassuming guy in person. If you guys were on set and met him, you'd probably realize he's not particularly flamboyant. He's kind of a reserved guy. I saw this guy. You know, he's a good-looking guy, just kind of keeping to himself on the couch, and I didn't really clock him as being a breakout star. Gayle, my casting director came over and said, "I want you to keep an eye on this guy." She said, "He is a star." I said, "Okay, fine."

Came in, he did the read, and I was really impressed, but again, it's one of those days where I think we probably saw 20 or 30 guys that day. I put Matt in the pile of people to come back, and every time we saw him, he just would get a little bit better and a little bit better. He's a very good dramatic actor, and I wasn't 100% sure he could do the comedy, so we sat down and we talked about it before we took him to network and we sort of discussed the comedy. He's very intellectual when it comes to acting and sort of really processed it.

Went in the next day, and this was, again, very deep in the process. I think we'd probably been holding onto him for probably two months and bringing him in and bringing him in. We went into network, and USA's one of the best networks in the world to go into as far as casting goes. We walked in, and it was very inviting, very friendly room, and Matt just started the scene, and there was just that moment where everybody said, yes, this is it. Wow, this is the guy. That's it. That's how we found Matt.

Tim, I think we drug … a little longer for no other reason than just we wanted to be sure. When he and Matt read together, I think everybody in the room turned to everybody else and said, yes, we found the pair. I think we probably drug them around a little bit more in terms of bringing him in a couple more times, but I think it was really just, is this the show? Is this the way we want to go? After, I think, two times at network, we said yes, this is the way we want to go.

Ultimately, no matter what I write, no matter where the location is, it's really the show comes down to those two guys. I'm really happy now because I think probably the best thing we've got in the entire series right now is those two guys sitting in a car on a stakeout talking. It's two guys sitting in a car talking and it's that compelling, knock wood. I think we may have something good here.

Then, USA and Fox came together. I got the call originally on the pilot, and they said, "Hey, guess what? We're shooting in New York." "Really, okay." …, but we said we'd take it. We ended up shooting in December which was not when we intended, but I think we did a pretty good job of hiding the Christmas decorations which were on every street corner at that point.

We got there, and I was worried because I'd shot another show in Hawaii, and Hawaii was really tough, surprisingly. The traffic on Oahu was absolutely crazy, and you would sort of be staked down to a particular location. Once you got there in the morning, you're not moving until night, and I'd worried about that in New York.

A couple things worked for us there. One is the best thing about New York is just the production value you get. All we have to do is open a door or point a camera at a window, and we've got absolutely brilliant production value, right there, just by pointing at the city which is really nice. The other thing is the crew. I've never seen crew this good in my life. I have my producer in New York, Jeff King, knows the city really well and has been able to do an absolutely amazing amount for a basic cable budget.

The one thing I'm really proud about of the show is that he's got a really great look. Bronwen Hughes, who directed the pilot, she's from New York and did a really great job of just making the show look good. New York's actually been great. I went into it a just a little bit worried. It costs a little bit more to shoot there, but in the end, it ends up on screen.

The one thing I've got to say is USA, because I'd worked for four years developing with NBC, and NBC and USA are very closely linked. Jackie de Crinis and Jeff Wachtel over there and Sepiol, I'd worked with them prior to this show and prior to the strike, and USA especially was always very, very good at recognizing the contribution of writers. They were very much a network about their shows and their creators. I don't know if they've cancelled a series. I think pretty much every series I've had has stayed on the air, and I think that's kind of a testament to how much care they put into it.

Again, they're very selective. They only pick up a couple of things, but when they do, they really get behind it. I was just out here in L.A. The sheer amount of marketing they're putting behind the show is kind of staggering, and I know in New York it's crazy. I got a call from Matt Bomer one late night saying he just saw a poster. He said, "I'm ten times the size of God on the side of this building, and it's freaking me out a little bit."

USA has always been very good. In general in the industry, it's a really interesting question. I don't know if there's more respect for writers. The one thing in a weird way I think may have happened sort of away from, as you know, of the networks, USA's doing pretty good right now. Some of the other networks I've noticed (and this is just sort of my impression of it), but I've noticed that there's almost been a little bit of a devaluing in areas for writers. The idea that, hey, with the internet, do we really need this expensive production? Why don't we just throw up a Webisode instead? We'll get the same number of eyes on a YouTube hit that we can get on a show that's costing us $3 million an episode. We can get the same effect with a viral YouTube video that costs $1,500.

I've noticed a shift there in terms of sort of the use of writers. I think that may be explained because during the strike, there was sort of scramble to say, okay, there's no scripted material coming out in the traditional sense, but people want scripted material. In a way, I was very excited about seeing that people still wanted scripted material. For awhile, most writers I know, we were very worried that reality would just sort of take over, and there wouldn't be a place for scripted stuff anymore. I think the strikes proved there is. Whether or not that will translate into sort of more shows, I don't know.

I think ultimately, they'll probably translate into maybe a lot more sort of cheaper shows. I think once the web is fully integrated, it'll be interesting to see, but I'd say within the next ten years, it's going to be really fascinating to see if traditional scripted shows can survive. I think there'll always be a place for them, but it'll be interesting to see what format. In five years, maybe it'll be guys running around with HD cameras shooting stuff in their backyard.

We've gotten a really good response from the pilot, and I think the feeling that I've come away with from USA is that we know we've got a good show here, and relax, guys. Hopefully, we find it right away in the series, but if we don't, we're willing to stick with you for a little bit until we find the right show hopefully. I've been very excited about the episodes we've gotten done. Everybody at USA and Fox has been pretty happy with what we've gotten so far. I think we may have found it.

That said, I can feel it from the actors. I can feel it from the crew that, yes, there's definitely a sense of instead of just looking at it show-by-show, that we kind of can plan a season. Say, okay, let's try to make this work. Let's hone this as opposed to, okay, guys, if this one's not good, we're done. That really does translate nicely into a more relaxed crew and cast. You see it on screen.

From a writing standpoint, it's nice because we don't feel the need to compress everything. You know, it's like we've got to throw all the good stuff in the first episode. We feel like we can kind of parse it out. Yes, it's definitely a great network to be launched on.

I think we really sort of played with that on the pilot. In the first episodes we're doing here, we're sort of playing with that line. There's definitely sort of a balance. What I find works the best, at least for this show, is there's an interesting line where there's a certain amount of jeopardy that plays real. As long as the humor is contextual between the guys, it's pretty easy to pull it off.

The actors, also, are probably 80% or 90% key to this. We can write whatever we want, and if you're sitting there and you've got a dead body but the actors can find a way to make the lines play, humor us without sort of feeling like you're in bad taste, it's pretty nice, and we've got guys that do that. We actually don't have very many dead bodies. I think we have one in the first six that we actually see. We are kind of trying to shoot for sort of an elegance to the show.

The question of where we split the comedy and where we split the drama is a tough one. I tend to like the shows that have a little bit more drama to them. Of the six we've done so far, those tend to be my favorite by a slight margin. I kind of like stuff that has a little more … to it, but again, The Shield was my favorite show, so I've also screened them for friends and family who felt just the opposite, that they kind of like the ones that're a little more on the humor side. I think once we find that sweet spot and if we can stay within a few percentage points on either side of it, I think we'll be good.

One of the character traits Matt Bomer and I've discussed at length about Neal's character is that at heart he's kind of a 12-year-old. He's sort of a creature of the id. One of my favorite lines in the pilot is when Peter's yelling at him about his new digs in the mansion is he said, "I don't have a $2 million view of Manhattan that I share with a 23-year-old art student while we sip cappuccino in a cloud." Matt looks at him and says genuinely, "Why not?" For me, that was sort of the crux of the character which was when he says, "Why not?" he actually believes why not. Why don't you have these things? It wasn't a rhetorical question. It was they're there. You could have them, and for me, that was sort of the crux of Neal's character.

For me, Peter's character is he's very good at his job. He loves the puzzle, and Neal is sort of another piece of equipment for him. Yes, they end up, they have a friendship and stuff, but what Neal really is he's like the DNA test. He's like fingerprints. He's another tool for Peter to catch the bad guys. When it comes to catching him, Peter's not going to waste time. I think there's even a line in the pilot where he says, "We're not going to catch him with road blocks and wanted posters. You're not going to get Neal the regular way." Peter knows that to catch Neal, you go out and you find his weak spot which is Kate.

(Links)